JUDGMENT N.J. Pandya, J.-The petitioner No.1, a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, alongwith a private individual, have filed the present petition seeking various reliefs in connection with the respondent No. 1 Company, which is established since the year 1973, a Fertilizer Factory in Sancoale area of this State. The respondent No. 2 is the Chief Inspector of Factories of the State. respondent No.3 is the State Pollution Control Board, respondent No. 4 is the Central Pollution Control Board, respondent No. 5 is the State itself, respondent No. 6 is the Union of India and respondent No. 7 is the Appellate Authority constituted under Section 7 of the Factories Act, 1948, for the State of Goa. 2. The aforesaid array of various respondents would clearly indicate that various reliefs revolve round the breach of the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 and non-compliance with the air, water and environment pollution under different provisions of different Acts. 3. The respondent No.7 came to be joined subsequently by Order dated 18th July, 1988, or thereabout, because as a part of this operation for storing ammonia the respondent No. 1 Factory, had proposed installation of another hortonsphere in its factory premises which was not approved by the respondent No.2. Chief Inspector of Factories, but the Appellate Authority, respondent No.7, permitted the same. 4. Apart from the allegations as to the pollution, so far as the hortonsphere is concerned, there is also an element of likely catastrophe in the event of its rupture due to internal defects or it being a sphere standing right on the ground, like any other installation above it, on account of nearby important establishments of Navy and other related establishments. National Institute of Oceanography installations, as well as solitary Civil Aerodrome of the State, there is a possibility of either air- crash or damage during hostilities and therefore, it has been strongly urged by the petitioners that instead of storing ammonia in hortonsphere at atmospheric pressure, it should be done at normal atmospheric pressure in a double-walled tank. 5. Ammonia is usually found in nature in gaseous form. 5. Ammonia is usually found in nature in gaseous form. If it is to be stored in liquid state, which is generally the position in any Fertilizer Industry, it can be stored in liquid state either by storing at 4 atmospheric pressure referred to in the scientific terms as 4 Bar, or at normal atmospheric pressure under refrigeration bringing the temperature down to minus 30 0C. 6. The reasons for storing ammonia in liquid state might be many but we are not concerned with that. In either of the two methods, the eventual results is that ammonia is stored in liquid state. 7. Obviously, if it is stored at normal atmospheric pressure in the eventuality of catastrophe arising out of the very possibility indicated above, will not have the same disastrous results either for the factory, in particular, or for the populace of the area in general and therefore, this aspect has been strongly urged by the petitioners. 8. As a petition has been pending since the year 1988, and often it came up either for hearing or for seeking interim relief, or directions, the parties to the proceedings on both sides have kept on filing either their replies in the form of affidavits or supporting material in the form of documentary evidence, safety record reports, safety audit reports, as well as relevant literature with regard to fertilizer industry, more particularly, with reference to storage and usage of ammonia as one of the raw materials. 9. To begin with, we have the affidavit of the respondent No. 1 filed by the its Company Secretary Shri Ramkrishna patil, on 6th July, 1995, denying the various allegations of pollution and breach of various enactments with regard thereto. Alongwith that, as many as 20 documents are produced. The first happens to be a bunch of papers pertaining to Writ Petition No. 1464 of 1986, which came to be filed by Sancoale Farmer's Committee, in relation to this very Fertilizer Factory, belonging to the respondent No.1. This bunch of papers comprises of affidavits and counter-affidavits filed in the said petition alongwith supporting material resulting the allegation of discharge of polluted or untreated effluents, air or water pollution, etc. The Company has also taken care to produce alongwith it safety records and proof of various awards earned by the Company in the filed of pollution control. 10. This bunch of papers comprises of affidavits and counter-affidavits filed in the said petition alongwith supporting material resulting the allegation of discharge of polluted or untreated effluents, air or water pollution, etc. The Company has also taken care to produce alongwith it safety records and proof of various awards earned by the Company in the filed of pollution control. 10. The final outcome of the said petition, as per page 247, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has disposed of the petition, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for necessary steps, to be taken in regard to matters mentioned in the said Writ Petition. 11. In the aforesaid background of the disposal of the Writ Petition by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, to an extent, it could legitimately be said that in the present petition the petitioner No. 2 is essentially agitating his personal problem, no doubt very ably assisted by the petitioner No. 1, which is devoted to the laudable task of keeping watch on environmental deterioration on account of industrial activities and other related matters. 12. The matter has been pending since 1998. Once it came to be dismissed for default and was restored. In the meantime, as stated above, apart from the affidavit and documents filed by the respondent No.1, which is bunched together as Vol. II, with as many as 272 papers in the paper book of the petition itself, followed by what is referred to as Vol. I, with several documents produced by the petitioners running into hundreds of pages, it was obvious to all concerned that the petition does relate to environmental problems and possibility of disaster on account of storage of ammonia, it was therefore gone into on merits. The learned advocate Mrs. Alvares, appearing for the petitioners, formulated four points as under :- 1. relating to the air pollution particularly with regard to absence of notified standard for permissible limit of ammonia particles in air; 2. water pollution-This has a references to discharge of effluent by pipe opening out into the sea, as well as seepage into the dorvol springs which are situated in the property of the petitioner No.1; 3. seepage of ammonia and should it be allowed to be stored in hortonsphere or it should be directed to be stored in double-walled storage tank at atmospheric pressure? And 4. seepage of ammonia and should it be allowed to be stored in hortonsphere or it should be directed to be stored in double-walled storage tank at atmospheric pressure? And 4. safety of the plant and related matter of in-site emergency evacuation plan and similar plan for off-site, which will have an impact on the nearby population. 13. We are happy to place on record our appreciation of the spirit in which the matter was approached by all concerned. As befitting the responsible citizens and treating this to be a matter of public interest undue confrontationist approach was avoided and all the four points were addressed by all sides in a most cordial and cooperative atmosphere. 14. As a direct result, so far as point No.1 is concerned, there was hardly any controversy left. It is admitted position that for the State of Goa, no standard for ammonia particles in air has so far been fixed. 15. In other coastal State in the neighbourhood, namely the State of Kerala, two matters were hotly debated and argued before the Kerala High Court bringing about awareness as to the likely implication of storage of ammonia and the impact of its leekage in the air. 16. These matters are reported in AIR 1966 Ker, 8. in the case of V.S. Damodaran Nair and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., and AIR 1944 Ker. 308, in the case of Law Society of India v. Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors.. 17. In the process, one good thing that emerged for the State of Kerala was that the Central Pollution Control Board had under Section 17(1)(i) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, amended in 1987, entrusted to the Pollution Control Board of the State of Kerala, the function under Section 16(2)(h) of the Act, for laying down standard for ammonia in Indian air in the Cochin/Karimughal area. The State Control Board therefore, came out with a Notification dated 14th May, 1994. The standards fixed are as under:- Parameter Sampling duration Limit kg/m3 Ammonia 24 hours 400 Annual average of samples (2 samples drawn every week) 100 18. The State Control Board therefore, came out with a Notification dated 14th May, 1994. The standards fixed are as under:- Parameter Sampling duration Limit kg/m3 Ammonia 24 hours 400 Annual average of samples (2 samples drawn every week) 100 18. Everyone has agreed that the Court may issue directions to the Central Pollution Control Board, which is very much a party here, that similar delegation of power be made to the State Pollution Control Board of Goa for fixing the limits of ammonia in ambient air. This will be taken care of in the final Order. We may also indicates here that from the record, certain disturbing details are obtained and therefore, we are inclined to pass interim directions till the said standard is laid down after going through the said exercise of delegation of power, etc. 19. This will take us to the second point relating to the water e pollution. It may be mentioned here that during the pendency of the proceedings right from the year 1988, one commendable side effect has been to activate the respondent No. 1 Company further. We are happy to note that right from its inception it had been mindful of its social responsibility towards the pollution and its eradication. However, with the vigilance on the part of the petitioners on one hand and the eminent scrutiny by the Court on the other, we are happy to say, had promoted everyone towards positive action. 20. In the process, it is now accepted position that so far as the respondent No. 1 is concerned, it is a zero effluent Company. This a idea has been achieved by modifying the manufacturing process as also incorporating and adopting the latest technology for effluent treatment and retrieval of noxious gases and substances from the effluent. Since 1987 to 1996 the working of the Company from the point of view of pollution has been examined as also from the point of view of safety and risk emissions. Needles to say that all the three things are interwoven. The only difference is that if the other two factors, namely safety and risk are minimized with adequate attention to the effluent, the life-time effect will be the same of all the three factors. 21. Needles to say that all the three things are interwoven. The only difference is that if the other two factors, namely safety and risk are minimized with adequate attention to the effluent, the life-time effect will be the same of all the three factors. 21. In the year 1987, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996, during different months of the respective years, the problem has been, attached to by appointing a Task Force, going for safety Audit through Engineers India Ltd., New Delhi, on three different occasions in the year 1991, that risk analysis in a Company bases in India with Dutch collaborators was also brought in, another Task Force coming on the scene in the year 1994 and Safety Audit being carried out by Project Development India, Ltd., in the year 1995, followed by Environmental Audit again by that very Company in the year 1996. 22. The Engineers India Ltd. and the Project Development India Ltd. are Government of India Undertakings. The Task Force of the year 1987 and that of the year 1994, respectively, distinguished as Force No. 1 and Force No. II were constituted by the Government of Goa. 23. A 'Status At A Glance' chart has been prepared with supporting material by the respondent No. 1 which is hereinafter referred to as a "Chart". It clearly reveals that by the year 1996, almost all recommendations have been attended to. In the course of the hearing we were told and papers in that regard were also produced, that the respondent No.1 is planning closure in the first week of may, 1998, or thereabout and during that period not only they are going to overhaul the plant, but would like also to attend to safety, risk and pollution problems as well. Whatever steps are yet to be taken, the respondent No. 1 shall do so and wherever it is considered to be necessary to get either relaxation or exemption, with reference to the suggestion made by the various audit checking parties, the respondent No. 1 shall attend to it. 24. So far as water pollution is concerned, they have already written a letter in the month of February, 1998, on 23rd, to the Associate Director, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay, to depute a team of experts for carrying out radioactive tests for tracing suspected seepage from the plant. 24. So far as water pollution is concerned, they have already written a letter in the month of February, 1998, on 23rd, to the Associate Director, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay, to depute a team of experts for carrying out radioactive tests for tracing suspected seepage from the plant. This is indeed a state of the art method for finding out suspected seepage or leakage as the case may be. Once this aspect is attended to, the matter of water pollution so far as dorvol springs is concerned, if at all respondent No. 1 is contributing to this pollution, will certainly be taken care of. 25. This is not to say that the activity of respondent No. 1 had not adversely affected the waters of dorvol springs. On behalf of the petitioner No.1, a sketch has been produced to indicate where exactly would be the impact of activity of respondent No. 1, Factory. This being a hilly terrain, obviously there will be a sudden drop in the height in the course of running of the stream from its source, which has been pointed out to be two in number as per the said sketch. 26. The details therein are mentioned in Portuguese language. On the North Eastern side there is the first source written as "fonte". which is shown to be one of the sources of upper dorvol srping. "Fonte", means fountain. Another source is just below that, but slightly further towards North East and is larger in quantity. These two sources merge in the course of the down- hill journey towards the sea. As per the petitioners, the distance between "Odli Baom" and "Poim" creek, is about 500 mts. The three important points have been marked from the source down to the creek. The creek is referred to in the said chart in Portuguese as "poim". The said three points are water tank, “Odli Baim” and Railway culvert. "Odli Baim". means a well. With reference to these points, samples were taken and analysed. The situation seems to be well under control because as on 18th February, 1998, the main source pH factor is shown to be 6.3, but discharge of Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N is nil. The same is the case with Phosphates as p. whole Chlorides as Cl is 10.7 and Sulphates as SO4 is 3.6. 27. The situation seems to be well under control because as on 18th February, 1998, the main source pH factor is shown to be 6.3, but discharge of Ammoniacal Nitrogen as N is nil. The same is the case with Phosphates as p. whole Chlorides as Cl is 10.7 and Sulphates as SO4 is 3.6. 27. There is a very well noticed radical change at upper seepage and lower seepage near "Odli Baim". The first one turns out to 5.9 and 6.3 respectively. The other two are 31.7 and 22 and 0.24 and 0.07. respectively. The values are on the basis of milligram per litre (mg/ 1). Chlorides, however, take a sudden jump to 47.2 and 42.6. Sulphates also show a sudden jump of 40.2 and 44. At "Odli Baim" itself, the values are radically altered. pH factor is 5.0 while Nitrogen comes down to 0.12, with phosphates as nil. Chlorides as 18.5 and Sulphates as 52.3. 28. The third point of reference is Railway Culverts, where the values are 4.0, 0.81. 0.065. 20.6 and 50.3. 29. So far as dorvol splings are concerned, they are not shown to be waters considered to be safe for human consumption. The petitioners have tried to make out a case on the basis of some old documents, translation of which was given in the course of the last day of healing, indicating that somewhere in January, 1929. it was considered to be valuable enough to go for construction of work necessary for the embankment of running waters of "Dervor" and so on. No doubt, in the course of conducting tests of the waters and collecting samples for the purpose, it was indicated that the spring c waters were having medicinal values. On that also, there is hardly and supporting material on record. Therefore, in our opinion, except for the petitioner No. 2 having sentimental value over this part of his family estate, the waters will have to be considered on the same basis as spring wells are in the area, taking their quality as on the date of test as it is. It may also be noted here that dorvol springs are made use of by the people of the surrounding area for their daily activity of bathing, washing clothes and at times, even cattle, including buffaloes would be cooling themselves in the waters. It may also be noted here that dorvol springs are made use of by the people of the surrounding area for their daily activity of bathing, washing clothes and at times, even cattle, including buffaloes would be cooling themselves in the waters. Coupled with this is the practice of liberal use of fertilizer for plants like coconut, cashew and other crops. In the land belonging to the petitioner No.2, these crops are being taken. 30. However, to the extent to which the aforesaid values are attributable to the activity of the respondent No.1, Factory and the aforesaid use either of the water or that of the fertilizer, cannot absolve the respondent No. 1 from doing its duty. 31. Again, we are happy to note that the respondent No. 1 is very mindful of that and including their effort of bringing in the expert c from BARC (Bhabha Atomic Research Centre), they are doing all that is required with the aid of latest technology to see that effluents do not seep away into the dorvol springs. Needless to say that the respondent No. 1 will have to take care of the pipe line that they have fitted for discharge of water into the sea. The pipe line will have to be periodically checked and kept serviceable without any breakage so that before the water reaches the sea it does not seep into the nearby soil through which the pipe line passes. The existence of the pipeline is not in dispute and is set out in the said affidavit-in-reply of respondent No.1 at page 33. para 13 of Vol. II of the paper book. However, it was claimed in the course of arguments, that the pipeline is no longer in use. 32. Obviously, it has been kept in situ for being used, if necessary. When a facility is thus being made available, it is but proper that the same is repaired and kept in state of readiness so that while achieving the purpose for which it is kept, damage is not done. 33. In this regard also, the respondent No. 1 had shown prompt readiness and therefore, hardly anything further is required to be done. 34. 33. In this regard also, the respondent No. 1 had shown prompt readiness and therefore, hardly anything further is required to be done. 34. The remaining two points, safety with regard to the storage of ammonia and safety of the plant in general with particular reference to its impact on population of the area, we feel could be taken up together. If there is any mishap with regard to the storage of ammonia, the safety of the population in the area will directly be linked up with the event arising out of operation of the plant itself. 35. Now, talking of mishap, particularly with reference to the storage facility, it may be stated at the outset that all throughout the a world so far storing of ammonia is concerned, for smaller quantity of 500 MT upto 3000 MT the method of hortonsphere is followed, and double-walled tank storing ammonia at air pressure is generally being reworted to for quantity of 5000 MT and above. 36. As stated above, storage of ammonia under pressure in a device like hortonsphere brings about a change in the state of the gas automatically. Storing it at pressure of 4 atmospheric pressure referred to as 4 Bar, the gas automatically turns into liquid. 37. Handing of ammonia in liquid state is much easier both for manufacturing purposes and for transportation. 38. To achieve liquid state for ammonia otherwise than by method of storing it at a pressure can be achieved by refrigeration. For this purpose it has to be kept at -33C. This is because the boiling point of ammonia is -33C. 39. This would necessarily mean that the store ammonia at atmospheric pressure in a double-walled tank, the Company will have to provide for refrigeration plant as well. The cost of running a refrigeration plant constantly sought to be balanced against the relative economy of string ammonia at 4 Bar atmospheric pressure in hortonsphere, whereby the gaseous state of ammonia turns into liquid state. 40. The respondent No. 1 Factory, has got two hortonspheres on the site. However, it is well-established that at a time only one of the two is used for storing ammonia and the other one is kept in stand-by mode with very little quantity of ammonia kept therein. To achieve stand-by mode this is necessary. 40. The respondent No. 1 Factory, has got two hortonspheres on the site. However, it is well-established that at a time only one of the two is used for storing ammonia and the other one is kept in stand-by mode with very little quantity of ammonia kept therein. To achieve stand-by mode this is necessary. Moreover, the requirement of the second hortonsphere is for the purpose of having high rate of safety margin in case of emergency. 41. It the sphere in which the liquid ammonia is stored suddenly develops leakage or any such emergency relating to it develops. promptly the quantity stored therein can be transferred into the stand-by hortonsphere, thereby averting a major disaster. 42. The stand-by facility also helps in carrying out periodical checking and testing of another hortonsphere which might have been in constant use for storing ammonia in liquid state. All these details are set out in the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1 by the said Shri Patil on 10th March, 1998. The affidavit starting from page 831 to page 879 forms part of what is referred to as Vol. II. It covers the entire safety aspect which is now under discussion. On earlier occasion, i.e. 19th February, 1998, certain questions had arisen which were to be answered and points that had to be clarified with regard to the safety. 43. As a result, as stated in para 1 at page 833, the respondent No. 1 has put everything on record with regard to the inspection of the plant, various improvements made by enhancing of technology and machinery and explaining the observations of the Project and a Development India Ltd. in relation to the interlocking system, etc. providing for safety and other related matter. 44. There is a permanent arrangement for carrying our inspection by a specially constituted team assisted by other four members having experience in different fields. Their recommendations are sent to the respective sections of the plant and they are addressed with a copy to the Maintenance Engineer. The repairs conducted pursuant to their report are also periodically checked by them. 45. At page 837 in Vol. II and II.3 the various tools/instruments for the purpose of inspection are set out and they range from ultrasonic devices. Dye Penetrant Testing Kits to Magnetoscope. High Frequency and High Voltage Spark Testers. In all they are nine in number. The repairs conducted pursuant to their report are also periodically checked by them. 45. At page 837 in Vol. II and II.3 the various tools/instruments for the purpose of inspection are set out and they range from ultrasonic devices. Dye Penetrant Testing Kits to Magnetoscope. High Frequency and High Voltage Spark Testers. In all they are nine in number. 46. The services of outside agencies are also hired as set out in the last part of page 837 with details of tests conducted by them set out at page 839. This includes Radiography. In-situ Metallography, Fibroscopy, Thermography Survey, including Remote Filed Electromagnetic Testing. 47. We are satisfied about the measures taken. 48. Now, we come to the important aspect of increase in production with a view to examine whether there is an impact on the safety of the plant. This is required to be considered because the Project Development of India Report found that certain safety devices like trip switches, interlocking device, etc. have been bye-passed and put of the commission. 49. So far as the increase in production is concerned, details are set out in III, first section being para III.1 at page 841. Replacement by latest equipment led to distinct improvement as set out in d paragraph III.2 at page 848. Thus, without increasing the' capacity with changes in equipment and adopting the latest technology the product is achieved. Change in technology and new tools as well as equipment would necessarily make some of these devices referred to above which were forming part of the original design of the plant became either redundant or out-dated. Precisely for this reasons a control room has been established. Before proceeding further, we may note that the aforesaid explanation with regard to higher productivity has been set out at page 841, the last being para III.2. 49. The defect noted in the P.D.I.L. Report has been explained in paragraph IV. 1 at page 857, continuing further with respect to other safety devices upto page 865, which mean that the Company has gone into installation of distributed control system in a phased manner to replace old pneumatic instruments, thus improving further reliability of the total system. The Company is going in further for the improvement as Engineers India Ltd. set out in Annexure I to the said affidavit at pages 881 to 885. 50. The Company is going in further for the improvement as Engineers India Ltd. set out in Annexure I to the said affidavit at pages 881 to 885. 50. The point of hortonsphere is specially addressed to at paragraph IV. 5 of the said affidavit. Hortonsphere is essentially a metallic device of spherical shape. It has been so constructed to withstand high atmospheric pressure at which at gas is stored and because of the pressure it turns into a liquid. This necessarily calls for a check as to the state of the metal from time-to-time of the sphere which is being inspected as per the details set out in paragraph IV. 5 at page 867. No sooner inspection is carried out by competent persons appointed by the Chief Controller of Explosive under SMPV Rules, 1981, the Company further carries out tests like Visual Inspection. Ultrasonic thickness testing, Hardness survey, Metallurgical examination, Ultrasonic Flaw Detection, Radiography, Dye Penetrant Test. External Inspection and Hydrostatic test. 51. The first of the two hortonspheres was inspected during June 1989 to February, 1990 and again in December, 1993 to January, 1994. The second hortonsphere commissioned in March, 1989 was tested from February, 1992 to April, 1992 and February 1995 to April, 1995. As a result of this periodical testing, the licence of respondent No.1 company has been renewed upto 31st March. 2000. 52. The hortonsphere is provided with monitoring devices. There are Ammonia Sensors around the hortonsphere as set out in para IV. 6 at page 869. The sensors being of semi-conductor type they are housed in an explosion-proof enclosure. They are sealed and they do not required any maintenance. They are made water proof as well. Their functioning is tested once in ten days. This is done by the simple method of putting Ammonia-filled bottles in front of the sensor to find out whether the tested sensor gives an alarm in the control room or not. 53. Simulation Tests are also carried out as per para IV. 8 and paras IV. 9 and IV. 10 set out further details of the safety measures taken for the personnel and plant. 54. This necessarily would required holding of mock drills and exercises details of which are set out in para IV. 11. 55. This would mean that on-site safety measures are adequate and there is a safety plan for managing any disaster within the site. 10 set out further details of the safety measures taken for the personnel and plant. 54. This necessarily would required holding of mock drills and exercises details of which are set out in para IV. 11. 55. This would mean that on-site safety measures are adequate and there is a safety plan for managing any disaster within the site. About the off-site plan, the Company has categorically stated in para IV. 12 that it is required to be worked out and is in the process of being finalized. Obviously, therefore, directions will have to be issued with regard to the same. 56. Danger as to the hortonsphere can come from within the sphere on account of storing of ammonia at 4 Bar pressure as also from outside in the form of some accident. The accident can well be in the shape of crashing of something on the sphere and breaking it. This crashing of something, as per the petitioners, could be real and a very great potential can be visualized from the fact that in the vicinity there is an Airport. About the existence of the Airport no one can, deny. However, the crashing of an aircraft directly on the hortonsphere could never have been taken as one of the highly probable causes for disaster which is by and large belied in the present complex state of daily life as also the fact that any sophisticated technology will bring alongwith it likely dangers as well. The extreme example is that of nuclear technology put into use for peaceful purpose like generating electricity. Manufacture of fertilizer, though potentially not that risky can certainly be treated as a high- risk industry from the point of view of impact on human life in case of disaster, for the reason that they deal with chemicals which are hazardous for human existence. 57. Having decided to go in for the latest technology, as also for manufacture of commodity like fertilizer, a policy decision is already taken implicitly that they are ready for danger. The only thing is that this danger should be minimized as far as possible and the concerned people should not be found wanting in taking appropriate steps as to safety measures. 58. The only thing is that this danger should be minimized as far as possible and the concerned people should not be found wanting in taking appropriate steps as to safety measures. 58. In this background, if the controversy of hortonsphere is addressed and understood, it become clear that right from the installation of the first hortonsphere to the installation of the second, the petitioners have been under as impression that the maximum capacity of ammonia is stored. At page 917 of the additional documents Vol. I is a statement showing that on an average ammonia is stored in the quantity of 600 MT to 1500 MT. The second hortonsphere was not a surreptitious exercise of augmenting the capacity without licence. A lot many documents have been filed in this regard and the aforesaid Kerala decision too have been cited, which can now be referred to. 59. V.S. Damodaran Nair and Am: v. State of Kerala and Ors., AIR 1966 Ker. 8 deals with slackness on the part of the State Pollution Board of Kerala and therefore directions were issued. We are: happy to place on record the fact that in the instant case the State Pollution Control Board is not found wanting. The other decision. Law Society of India v. Fertilizer and Chemicals. Travancore Ltd. and Ors., AIR 1994 Ker. Vol. 81 page 308, is of great importance for the reason that the authority leads directly to the hazard of storage of ammonia and air pollution coming thereby. In that case the storage capacity of 10.000tonnes was involved. Starting with the year 1946, the Fertilizer Company there had augmented its capacity of the ammonia plant reaching upto 340 tonnes per day which again increased to 600 tonnes per day in the year 1973. Further increase was being contemplated to the tune of 900 tonnes per day. 60. Apparently, the stores tank was not at the Factory site. It was housed in what is known as Willingdon Island off the Cochin Harbour. On that island there are naval establishments as well. Both the Port Trust and the Navy had given their clearance for construction of the tank. The learned Judges addressed themselves to two broad questions as set out in para 52 at page 322 of the said report. On that island there are naval establishments as well. Both the Port Trust and the Navy had given their clearance for construction of the tank. The learned Judges addressed themselves to two broad questions as set out in para 52 at page 322 of the said report. The Willingdon Island is West of the Cochin Harbour and on account of the wind direction, if there be any mishap, direct impact will be on the Cochin Harbour as well and the entire township. Adverting to the fact that the tank is placed in a Port area very close to the runway of the Airport and very near to the Southern Naval Command, the learned Judges discussed the matter and finally issued directions for closures and removal of the storage facility from Willingdon Island. Needless to say, relying on this authority the learned advocate for the petitioners has strongly urged that hortonsphere be replaced by double-walled tank at atmospheric pressure. 61. No doubt at first say it would appear that storage at atmospheric pressure in the event of leakage will not be as hazard-prone as leakage from storage facility under pressure. However, this by itself, in our opinion, would not be enough. 62. Firstly, the accepted position being that smaller quantity of ammonia is being stored in a device called hortonsphere and ranging from 500 metric tonnes to 3000 metric tonnes. in the background of the aforesaid figures of actual storage being from 600 metric tonnes to 1500 metric tonnes. the risk factor, if any, is already cut to half. 63. Coupled with this is the stand-by facility of second hortonsphere. 64. On the whole, therefore, the hortonspheric method of storing ammonia, in our opinion, is not found to be a hazard as it was in the case of the Law Society of India v. Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd., (supra) leading to either shutting or shifting of the storage facility or changing it from one place of the other. 65. Now we turn to the various directions that are required to be issued in the instant case. 66. First and foremost is of course to the Central Pollution Board, respondent No.4. to pass necessary orders delegating the power to the State Pollution Control Board, respondent No.3. as set out above, under Section 16(2)(h) read with Section 17(1)(i) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. 66. First and foremost is of course to the Central Pollution Board, respondent No.4. to pass necessary orders delegating the power to the State Pollution Control Board, respondent No.3. as set out above, under Section 16(2)(h) read with Section 17(1)(i) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. as amended in 1987 so that after carrying out required monitoring exercise the State Control Board, respondent No. 3 is able to fix the standard of air with ammonia. 67. Ammonia being quite a hazardous substance in itself and virtually an emphyteusis of life based on carbon chemistry which in turn is dependent on oxygen with cycle of carbondioxide, in relation to vegetation around, in our opinion, with reference to the aforesaid 1994 Kerala decision certain immediate directions are required to be issued. Further, this is called for in our opinion, because the Central Pollution Control Board as well as the State Pollution Control Board will take their own time in passing necessary orders and carrying out the exercise. 68. The learned Judges in the 1994 Kerala decision with painstaking efforts have displayed the toxic effects of ammonia in paragraphs 55 and 56 of the Judgment at page 322 of the report. The ambient standards fixed by the Kerala Board seems to be largely guided by the fact of ammonia concentration-wise particularly in the table appearing on that page. For ready reference the same is extracted herein-below : Vapour concentration (ppm-v/v) General toxic effect Exposure period 25 Odour detectable by most persons. 50 No adverse effect. For eight hours. 100 No adverse effect for average worker. Deliberate exposure for long periods not advisable. 400 Immediate nose and throat irritation. No serious effect from 30 to 60 minutes. 700 Immediate eye irritation. No serious effect from 30 to 60 minutes. 1700 Convulsive coughing, severe eye, nose and throat irritation. Could be fatal after 30 minutes. 2000-5000 Convulsive coughing, severe eye, nose and throat irritation. Could be fatal after 15 minutes. 5000-10000 Respiratory spasm, rapid asphyxia. Fatal within minutes. Keeping the uppermost minimum of 400 vapour concentration (ppm- v/v). 700 Immediate eye irritation. No serious effect from 30 to 60 minutes. 1700 Convulsive coughing, severe eye, nose and throat irritation. Could be fatal after 30 minutes. 2000-5000 Convulsive coughing, severe eye, nose and throat irritation. Could be fatal after 15 minutes. 5000-10000 Respiratory spasm, rapid asphyxia. Fatal within minutes. Keeping the uppermost minimum of 400 vapour concentration (ppm- v/v). where there is a margin of 30 minutes to 60 minutes for people to run for safety till the aforesaid exercise is carried by the State Pollution Control Board, we direct that the Control Board shall immediately proceed to monitor, without waiting for delegation of power, from the Central Pollution Control Board, to find out what is the current position. There is reports indicating the position of ammonia in ambient air with reference to all the cardinal points of the compass when tests were conducted on 5th May, 1993. With reference to the aforesaid table as culled out from the said Kerala judgment, at pages 19 and 23, the rates are indeed alarming, more so at page 19. This would compel us to issue immediate direction. 69. This would be more necessary as is revealed from page 299 of Vol. II. The stack (chimney) height is less than what is required. The important of stack emanating the effluent in the air can never be overemphasized. Pursuant to the directions that are being issued, if it is found necessary, the respondent No. 1 shall be directed by the respondent No.3. the Goa State Pollution Control Board, to increase the height of the stack. This could easily be done, as in the month of May, 1998, the respondent No.1 is going to take a shut down. 70. This they shall do forthwith, as in the month of May, 1998, the plant is liable to be shut down for maintenance and other reasons. Checking thereafter would not be that accurate because the present concentration in and around a factory and in the nearby area will be dissipated and would not therefore, give a correct picture. 71. The usual formula of stack height as set out in the book of "Air Pollution" by Professors M.N. Rao and H.V.N. Rao published by Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi, shall be kept in mind. 71. The usual formula of stack height as set out in the book of "Air Pollution" by Professors M.N. Rao and H.V.N. Rao published by Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi, shall be kept in mind. Ranging from 10-40 times the stack height, the Goa State Pollution Control Board, respondent No.3, shall take samples periodically, work out the average and find out whether it is within the range as set out upto item No. 4 of the aforesaid table extracted from the said Kerala Judgment. 72. In case in finds the level to be abnormally high, the respondent No. 3 shall serve notice to the respondent No. 1 for taking immediate remedial measures. So far as the stack height is concerned, we are told it is of 60 mts. The aforesaid factor of 10-40 would be worked out on that basis. Needless to say monitoring will have to be done with all the four cardinal points of the compass. i.e., North, South, East and West, particularly with reference to the wind direction, entire quadrant and if necessary, both the quadrants in that direction i.e., South, West and North, in the danger of 180 will have to be kept in mind for this purpose. 73. Off-site plan is yet to be worked out. Respondent No.3. Goa State Pollution Control Board. alongwith respondent No. 1. shall carry out the exercise and periodically inform the petitioner, more particularly petitioner No.1, about the progress made. It shall be open to the petitioner No. 1 to move the Court for obtaining further directions in this regard. The respondent No. 1 and 2 shall carry out this direction within a period of three months from today and inform the same to the Court after informing the petitioner No.1. The report will be considered by the Court and whatever direction that might be found necessary at that stage will be issued on hearing of the parties. 74. Respondent No. 1 shall file periodically reports before the respondent No.3 as also before this Court at quarterly intervals as to the steps taken and more particularly with regard to the test that is d to be conducted with the help of BARC. 75. 74. Respondent No. 1 shall file periodically reports before the respondent No.3 as also before this Court at quarterly intervals as to the steps taken and more particularly with regard to the test that is d to be conducted with the help of BARC. 75. Respondent No. 1 as well as respondent No. 3 shall, where necessary, file Miscellaneous Application in this very Writ Petition, though it is being disposed of so that consistent with the progress made in the matter, further directions, if necessary, can be issued and progress can be monitored. 76. In our opinion, nothing further is required to be done in the instant case. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of accordingly. Disposed of accordingly.