JUDGMENT Barin Ghosh, J. The petitioner No.1 is an Association of the Nursing Homes of West Bengal and is registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. It is the case of the petitioner No.1 that the members of the petitioner No.1 are registered Clinical Establishments and are having licences to keep and and carry on such establishments under the West Bengal Clinical Establishment Act, 1950 and the Rules framed thereunder. It is the case of the petitioner No.1 that its members are paying a total sum of Rs. 400 to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation for each bed under the head "conservancy charges" which include charges for removal of bio-medical waste. The petitioner No.1 has, therefore, challenged the notification dated 30th September, 1999 issued by the West Bengal Pollution Control Board by which members of the petitioner No.1 have been asked to pay Annual Authorisation Application• Fee and Annual Consent to Operate principally on the ground that the Pollution Control Board has no authority to claim any such amount. The said notification of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board dated 30th September, 1999 runs as follows :- "West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Paribesh Bhawan Dated. 31.9.1999 No. 642(89)-13/WPB-E (VII) 198 To, North Calcutta Nursing Home 223, A.P.C. Road, Calcutta-700 004 Attn.-In Charge Sub. 1. Application for 'Consent to Operate' and 2. Application for 'Authorisation for Bio-Medical Waste'. Sir, The Bio-Medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 came into force on 20th July, 1998. Under the provisions of the said rules all health care establishments should apply for 'Authorisation' in Form 1 in duplicate with requisite fees. They should also apply for' consent to operate' as required under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 for the current year. The authorisation application form is enclosed. Application forms for 'consent to operate' may be obtained from this office on payment of Rs. 100/- for 3 forms. Fee Structure: For Authorisation Applications: Capital Investment (Rs.) of health care Establishments (actual investment inclusive of land building, equipments & infrastructure) Annual fees (Rs.) Below 1 lakh 500 Between 1 lakh and 5 lakhs 1500 Between 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs 2500 Beyond 10 lakhs 5000 Authorisation application for bio-medical waste should be accompanied with requisite fees for the years 1998-'99 & 1999-2000. For Consent to Operate: Capital Investment (Rs.) of health care Establishments (actual investment inclusive Of land, Building, equipments & infrastructure) Annual fees (Rs.) Upto 10 lacs 600 10 lacs to 30 lacs 1,000 30 lacs to 60 lacs 2,000 60 lacs to 1 crore 3,000 1 crore to 5 crores 5,000 5 crores to 10 crores 10,000 10 crores to 50 crores 20,000 50 crores to 100 crores 50,000 Beyond 100 crores 1,00,000 'Consent to operate' application should be accompanied with- a) requisite fees for the current year and 4 years prior to the current year if the establishment came into existence prior to the last 5 years; OR b) requisite fees from the year of its coming into existence if it came into existence within a span of 4 years from the current year. You may please note that the duly completed application along with relevant annexures for 'Consent to Operate' and 'Authorisation for Bio-Medical Waste' should reach this office latest by 31st October, 1999 failing which legal action will be initiated. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Member Secretary)" 2. The learned counsel for the respondent, Pollution Control Board, has drawn our attention to the notification dated 20th July, 1998 wherefrom it appears that after inviting objections and upon due consideration thereof the Central Government made the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 6, 8 and 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Rule 3(5) of the said Rules and Schedule I thereto are as follows:- "3.(5) 'Bio-medical waste' means any waste, which is generated during the diagnosis, treatment or immunization of human beings or animals or in research activities pertaining thereto or in the production or testing of biologicals, and including categories mentioned in Schedule 1;" "SCHEDULE-I CATEGORIES OF BIG-MEDICAL WASTE Option Waste Category Treatment and Disposal Category No.1 Human Anatomical incineration @/ Waste (human tissues, deep burial organs, body parts) Category No.2 Animal Waste incineration @/ (animal tissues, organs, deep burial body parts, carcasses, bleeding parts, fluid, blood and experimental animals used in research, waste generated by veterinary hospitals colleges, discharge from hospitals, animal houses) Category No.3 Microbiology & Biotechnology local Waste (Wastes from autoclaving/ laboratory cultures, stocks or micro-waiving/ specimens of microorganism incineration. live or attenuated vaccines, human and animal cell culture used in research and infectious agents from research and industrial laboratories, wastes from production of biologicals, toxins, dishes and devices used for transfer of cultures) Category No.4 Waste sharps disinfection (needles, syringes, scalpels, (chemical blades, glass, etc. that may treatment/ cause puncture and cuts. Autoclaving/ This includes both used and Micro- unused sharps) waiving and mutilation/ shredding. Category No.5 Discard Medicines and incineration/ Cytotoxic drugs (Wastes destruction comprising of outdated, and drugs contaminated and disposal in discarded medicines) secured landfills. Category No.6 Solid Waste incineration@ (Items contaminated with auto-claving/ blood and body fluids micro-waiving. including cotton, dressings, soiled plaster casts, lines, beddings, other material contaminated with blood.) Category No.7 Solid Waste disinfection (wastes generated by chemical from disposable treatment items other than @@ the waste sharps autoclaving such as tubings, /micro- catheters, intravenous waiving sets etc.) and mutilation /shredding. Category No.8 Liquid Waste disinfection (waste generated from by chemical laboratory and washing, treatment cleaning, housekeeping @ and and disinfecting discharge activities) into drains. Category No.9 Incineration Ash disposal in (Ash from municipal incineration of any landfill. biomedical waste) Category No. 10 Chemical Waste Chemical (chemical used in treatment@ production of and biologicals, discharge chemicals in into drains disinfection) for liquid and secured landfills". 3. The definition of the word "Bio-medical waste" is an inclusive definition and therefore has no limit. The categories mentioned in Schedule I do not limit the meaning given to bio-medical waste. Schedule I, however, takes into account the frequently available bio-medical waste and directs how the same should be treated. Rule 3(7) of the said Rules says that Bio-medical waste treatment facility means any facility wherein treatment, disposal of bio-medical waste or processes incidental to such treatment or disposal is carried out. Rule 3(8) of the said Rules says that an occupier in relation to any institution generating bio-medical waste means a person who has control over that institution and/or its premises and includes a hospital, nursing home etc. Rule 3W) of the said Rules says that operator of a bio-medical waste facility means a' person who owns or controls or operates a facility for collection, reception, storage, transport, treatment, disposal or any other form of handling of bio-medical waste. Rule 3W) of the said Rules says that operator of a bio-medical waste facility means a' person who owns or controls or operates a facility for collection, reception, storage, transport, treatment, disposal or any other form of handling of bio-medical waste. Rule 4 of the said Rules casts an obligation upon an occupier of an institution generating bio-medical waste to take all steps to ensure that such waste is handled without any adverse effect to human health and the environment. Rule 5(2) casts an obligation upon every occupier, where required, to set up in accordance with the time schedule as mentioned in Schedule VI to the said Rules, requisite bio-medical waste treatment facilities for the treatment of waste and to ensure requisite treatment of waste at a common waste treatment facility or any other waste treatment facility. Rule 5(1) of the said Rules• directs treatment and disposal of bio-medical waste in accordance with Schedule I and in compliance with the standards prescribed in Schedule V. Schedule VI to the said Rules is as follows: "SCHEDULE VI SCHEDULE FOR WASTE TREATMENT FACILITIES LIKE INCINERATION/AUTOCLA VE/MICROW A VE SYSTEM A. Hospitals and nursing homes in by 31st December, 1 towns with population of 30 lakhs 999 or earlier. and above B. Hospitals and nursing homes in towns with population of below 30 lakhs: (a) with 500 beds and above by 31st December, 1999 or earlier, (b) with 200 beds by 31st December, 2000 or and above but less earlier, than 500 beds (c) with 50 beds by 31st December, 2001 or and above but earlier, less than 200 beds (d) with less than by 31st December, 2002 or 50 beds earlier". 4. Rule 6 of the said Rules gave directions relating to segregation, 'packaging, transportation and storage of bio-medical waste. It says, inter alia, that no untreated bio-medical waste shall be kept stored beyond a period of 48 hours. Rule 7 of the said Rules directs that every State and Union Territory shall establish a prescribed authority for granting authorisation and implementing the rules. It further provides that the prescribed authority for the State or Union Territory shall be appointed within one month of the coming into force of the said Rules. Rule 7 of the said Rules directs that every State and Union Territory shall establish a prescribed authority for granting authorisation and implementing the rules. It further provides that the prescribed authority for the State or Union Territory shall be appointed within one month of the coming into force of the said Rules. Rules 7(4), 7(5), 7(6), 7(7) and 7(8) of the said Rules are as follows: "7(4) The prescribed authority shall on receipt of Form I make such enquiry as it deems fit and if it is satisfied that the applicant possesses' the necessary capacity to handle bio-medical waste in accordance with these rules, grant or renew an authorization, as the case may be. 7(5) An authorization shall be granted for a period of three years, including an initial trial period of one year from the date of issue. Thereafter, an application shall be made by the occupier/operator for renewal. All such subsequent authorization shall be for a period of three years. A provisional authorization will be granted for the trial period, to enable the occupier/operator to demonstrate the capacity of the facility. 7(6) The prescribed authority may after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the applicant and for reasons thereof to be recorded in writing, refuse to grant or renew authorization. 7(7) Every application for authorisation shall be disposed of by the prescribed authority within ninety days from the date of receipt of the application. 7(8) The prescribed authority may cancel or suspend an authorization, if for reasons, to be recorded in writing, the occupier/operator has failed to comply with any provision of the Act or these rules:" 5. It appears that on receipt of an application for authorization the prescribed authority would enquire upon and be satisfied that the applicant possesses the necessary capacity to handle bio-medical waste. If the prescribed authority finds that the applicant is not in possession of such necessary capacity to handle bio-medical waste, it may refuse to grant the authorization. Whether to grant authorization or not to grant authorization must be decided within 90 days. If a decision is taken to grant authorzation, the same shall be valid for a period of 3 years. After the expiry of 3 years the person so authorized would have to apply for renewal of the authorization and for that matter would have to apply afresh. If a decision is taken to grant authorzation, the same shall be valid for a period of 3 years. After the expiry of 3 years the person so authorized would have to apply for renewal of the authorization and for that matter would have to apply afresh. Upon such application once again the same procedure as is applicable for grant of authorization should be followed. Even after granting of the authorization or after renewing the authorization the prescribed authority may cancel the same if it appears that the applicant has lost capacity to handle such waste either permanently or temporarily, as the case may be. Rule 8 of the said Rules is as follows: "8. AUTHORISATION (1) Every occupier of an institution generating, collecting, receiving, storing, transporting, treating, disposing and/or handling bio-medical waste in any other manner, except such occupier of clinics, dispensaries, pathological laboratories, blood banks providing treatment/service to less than 1000 (one thousand) patients per month, shall make an application in Form 1 to the prescribed authority for grant of authorization. (2) Every operator of a bio-medical waste facility shall make an application in Form 1 to the prescribed authority for grant of authorization. (3) Every application in Form 1 for grant of authorization shall be accompanied by a fee as may be prescribed by the Government of the State or Union Territory." 6. Every occupier of an institution generating, collecting, receiving, storing, transporting, treating, disposing or handling bio-medical waste in any manner is obliged to make an application in Form 1 to the prescribed authority for grant of authorization. Only exception has been made to such occupier of clinics, dispensaries, pathological laboratories and blood banks who provide treatment or service to less than 1000 patients per month. The members of the petitioner No.1 being nursing homes they do not come within this exception. They are, therefore, obliged to make an application in Form 1 to the prescribed authority for grant of authorization. They are also obliged to pay a fee as may be prescribed by the Government of the State or the Union Territory at the time of making an application in Form 1. In terms ofthe said Rules, therefore, each member of the petitioner No. 1 having its nursing home in the city of Calcutta was obliged to set up bio-medical waste treatment facility latest by 31st December, 1999. In terms ofthe said Rules, therefore, each member of the petitioner No. 1 having its nursing home in the city of Calcutta was obliged to set up bio-medical waste treatment facility latest by 31st December, 1999. The other members of the petitioner No.1 were and are obliged to establish bio-medical waste treatment facilities on or before the dates mentioned in Schedule VI, set out above, having regard to the number of beds they have in their nursing homes. If the members of the petitioner No.1 have set up their own bio-medical treatment facility and operate the same then for that purpose also they are required to apply for and obtain authorization. In Rule 7(4) of the said Rules the words "capacity to handle bio-medical waste" have been used consciously. That must be read with Rule 5(2), whereunder such waste may be treated at facility of occupier, or at a common facility, which may include a facility established by a State or by a local authority: Under Rule 8 every occupier of an institution generating, collecting, receiving, storing, transporting, treating, disposing and/or handling bio-medical waste has been obliged to make an application for grant of authorization, so also the operator of a bio-medical waste facility has been obliged to do so. Reading of these Rules, makes it clear that every occupier of an institution generating bio-medical waste as that of a hospital or a nursing home is obliged to acquire capacity to handle bio-medical waste. This capacity may be acquired by such an occupier by installing necessary facility or by making an arrangement with an operator of a bio-medical waste treatment facility. Such an occupier may store and transport bio-medical waste himself to the operator of bio-medical waste facility or may engage a person authorized to store and transport the same. The said Rule is a complete code itself. It takes care of all and every eventuality. It makes it clear that every hospital or nursing home is required to obtain authorization from the prescribed authority upon making an application therefore, which application must be accompanied by a fee. No obligation has been cast upon the prescribed authority to treat the waste or to dispose of the same. The obligation to do so is that of the institution generating the same. How the same would be treated has been prescribed. No obligation has been cast upon the prescribed authority to treat the waste or to dispose of the same. The obligation to do so is that of the institution generating the same. How the same would be treated has been prescribed. If the institution generating such waste has necessary capacity to treat the waste, which may be its own facility or a facility of another with whom an arrangement is subsisting, the prescribed authority is required to be satisfied that effect. If the authority is so satisfied it would grant authorization for a period of three years of which one year may be a trial period. Since no service is being rendered for treatment of such waste there was no question of permitting the prescribed authority to charge any fee therefor and accordingly the said Rule has not granted any such authority to the prescribed authority. Since the prescribed authority is to determine whether the capacity to handle exists or not, which can only be ascertained upon gathering the facts, it has been permitted to ask for and obtain a fee along with the application. Once an authorization has been granted the same will continue for a period of three years of which there will be a trial period of one year, which inter alia, denotes that for one year prescribed authority would watch whether bio-medical waste is being treated in accordance with the said Rules. Even thereafter it shall be the continuous obligation of the prescribed authority to watch and see whether the waste is being treated in accordance with the said Rules for two more years during the substance of the authorization and if the same is not being so treated to cancel the authorization. The responsibility of the prescribed authority is, therefore, supervisory in nature. 7. As aforesaid the said Rules have been made in exercise of powers conferred by sections 6, 8 and 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 which are as follows: "6. Rules to regulate environmental pollution.- (1) the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules in respect of all or any of the matters referred to in section 3. Rules to regulate environmental pollution.- (1) the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules in respect of all or any of the matters referred to in section 3. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely: (a) the standards of quality of air, water or soil for various areas and purposes; (b) the maximum allowable limits of concentration of various environmental pollutants (including noise) for different areas; (c) the procedures and safeguards for the handling of hazardous substances; (d) the prohibition and restrictions on the handling of hazardous substances in different areas; (e) the prohibition and restrictions on the location of industries and the carrying on of processes and operations in different areas; (f) the procedures and safeguards for the prevention of accidents which may cause environmental pollution and for the providing for remedial measures for such accidents." "(8) Persons handling hazardous substances to comply with procedural safeguards.- No person shall handle or cause to be handled any hazardous substance except in accordance with such procedure and after complying with such safeguards as may be prescribed." 25. Power to make rules.- (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act. (2). In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely: (a) the standards in excess of which environmental pollutants shall not be discharged or emitted under section 7; (b) the procedure in accordance with and the safeguards in compliance with which hazardous substances shall be handled or caused to be handled under section 8; (c) the authorities or agencies to which intimation of the fact of occurrence or apprehension of occurrence of the discharge of any environmental pollutant in excess of the prescribed standards shall be given and to whom all assistance shall be bound to be rendered under sub-section (1) of section 9; . (d) the manner in which samples of air, water, soil or other substance for the purpose of analysis shall be taken under subsection (1) of section 11; (e) the form in which notice of intention to have a sample analyzed shall be served under clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section in 11; (f) the functions of the environmental laboratories, the procedure for the submission to such laboratories of samples of air, water, soil and other substances for analysis or test; the form of laboratory report; the fees payable for such report and other matters to enable such laboratories to carry out their functions under sub-section (2) of section 12; (g) the qualifications of Government Analyst appointed or recognized for the purpose of analysis of samples of air, water, soil or other substances under section 13; (h) the manner in which notice of the offence and of the intention to make a complaint to the Central Government shall be given under clause (b) of section 19; (i) the authority or officer to whom any report, returns, statistics, accounts and other information shall be furnished under section 20; (j) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed." 8. It is not the case of the petitioner No.1, nor it can be its case that Biomedical waste is not a hazardous substance. In terms of the provisions contained in sections 6,8 and 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 the Central Government has power to make Rules in respect of, inter alia, procedures and safeguards for the handling of hazardous substances and to compel handling of such substance in accordance with such procedure. The Central Government in exercise of such power has made the Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. We have not been persuaded to hold that any provision contained in the said Rule requires interference in any' manner whatsoever. 9. The question, however, is not whether Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 is proper or not. The question is whether the notification of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board dated 30th September, 1999 is proper or not. We have not been persuaded to hold that any provision contained in the said Rule requires interference in any' manner whatsoever. 9. The question, however, is not whether Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 is proper or not. The question is whether the notification of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board dated 30th September, 1999 is proper or not. It was submitted on behalf of the respondents that the State Government has appointed the Pollution Control Board as the prescribed authority under Rule 7 of the said Rules and has conferred power upon the Pollution Control Board to determine the fees payable under the said Rules and accordingly the Pollution Control Board has determined such field. In this connection reference was made to a notification dated 3rd December, 1998, which reads as follows : "In exercise of power conferred by Rule 7(1) of the Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998, the Governor is hereby pleased to declare West Bengal Pollution Control Board to be the Prescribed Authority for granting authorization and implementing the said Rules in the State of West Bengal. The Chairman of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board shall be the Chairperson of the Prescribed Authority." 10. This appears to be substantial compliance of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the said Rules, which says that the Government of every State and Union Territory shall establish a prescribed authority with such members as may be specified for granting authorization and implementing the said Rules and that if the prescribed authority comprises of more than one member, a chairperson for the authority shall be designated. 11. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 of the said Rules, as set out above, provides that every application for grant of authorization shall be accompanied by a fee as may be prescribed by the Government of the State or Union Territory. The word "prescribed" has not been defined. In the common parlance the word "prescribed" means, something laid down authoritatively. In law if one wants to prescribe something, he has to lay down the same authoritatively and announce. By section 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 the legislature has vested in the Central Government the power to make rules for carrying out the purpose of the said Act. In law if one wants to prescribe something, he has to lay down the same authoritatively and announce. By section 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 the legislature has vested in the Central Government the power to make rules for carrying out the purpose of the said Act. In terms thereof the Central Government has designated the State Government as the authority to prescribe the fees payable under Rule 8(3) of the said Rules. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that on 22nd September, 1999 the Pollution Control Board wrote a letter to the Joint Secretary, Department of Environment, Government of West Bengal proposing the fee structure for authorization under Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 and the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Environment Department, by a letter dated 8th October, 1999 stated that the Government has no objection to the said proposal of the Pollution Control Board and accordingly the Pollution Control Board has demanded fee for authorization under the Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 in the manner as has been indicated in the impugned notification. These two letters are as follows: "To The Secretary, Department of Environment, Dated 22-9-1999 Govt. of West Bengal, Calcutta. Sir, This refers to the finalization of fee structure for application for authorization under Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. In this connection I am to inform you that this office proposes the following fee structure for your consideration and necessary action at your end. Please. Capital investment of health care Amount of fee (Annual) Establishment. Below Rs. 1 lakh Rs. 500/- Between Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 5 lakhs Rs. 1,500/- Between Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 2,500/- Beyond Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 5,000/- Thanking you Yours faithfully, (Subir Mitra) Environmental Engineer." "From: M.K. Chattopadhyay, lAS, Joint Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal. To: The Member Secretary, West Begnal Pollution Control Board, Paribesh Bhavan, 10A, LA Block, Sect. III, Salt Lake City, Calcutta. Dated Calcutta, the 8th October, 1999 Sub: Fee structure for application for authorization under Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. Ref: Your Office Memo Nos. 1181-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. 22.9.99 & No. 2001-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. 1.10.99. Sir, I am directed to convey no objection to your proposal contained in Memo No. 1181-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. III, Salt Lake City, Calcutta. Dated Calcutta, the 8th October, 1999 Sub: Fee structure for application for authorization under Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. Ref: Your Office Memo Nos. 1181-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. 22.9.99 & No. 2001-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. 1.10.99. Sir, I am directed to convey no objection to your proposal contained in Memo No. 1181-7/WPB-E(III)/98 dt. 22.9.99 with regard to fee structure for application for authorization under Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Joint Secretary)" 12. Under no circumstances it can be said that no objection so given to the proposal of the Pollution Control Board tantamounted to prescription of fee by the State Government in terms of the Bio-medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998. The State Government may consider the proposal' of the Pollution Control Board. It may also consider other proposals from other quarters but it has to decide of its own what should be the fee and upon such decision to lay down the same authoritatively to be the prescribed fee for the time being in force and also to announce the same and unless and until the same has been done, it cannot be said there has been a prescription of fee by the State Government. By reason of the scheme of the said Rules the prescribed authority is incompetent to fix the fees for authorization even with no objection of the State Government. Furthermore, sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 says the application for grant of authorization shall be accompanied by fee and in terms of Rule 7 of the said Rules if the authorization is granted, the same shall remain valid for 3 years of which the initial one year may be a provisional authorization to enable the occupier or the operator, as the case may be, to demonstrate the capacity of the facility. There is, therefore, no just reason to suggest any annual fee. Then again, the entire exercise to appoint prescribed authority and to compel every occupier or operator to obtain authorization "from such prescribed authority is to ensure prescribed treatment of bio-medical waste. The prescribed authority, therefore, is to act as a watchdog and to supervise proper handling of bio-medical waste by the concerned occupier or operator. Then again, the entire exercise to appoint prescribed authority and to compel every occupier or operator to obtain authorization "from such prescribed authority is to ensure prescribed treatment of bio-medical waste. The prescribed authority, therefore, is to act as a watchdog and to supervise proper handling of bio-medical waste by the concerned occupier or operator. If the quantum of bio-medical waste handled by an occupier or by an operator is more, then the involvement of the prescribed authority to supervise handling of the same would automatically be more. It would, therefore, have no nexus with the capital invested by the occupier or the operator. If an institution is established to treat special type patients, such an institution may require a large investment but such institution may produce much less bio-medical waste and similarly an institution established with much lesser investment, may produce a large quantity of bio-medical waste if such institution is engaged in treating ordinary patients. Therefore, the amount of fee for grant of authorization, which has to be paid once for obtaining a three year authorization would largely depend upon the quantity of waste produced by the institution. Furthermore, fee for authorization only in so far as the health care institution, i.e., the occupier, has been thought of and not of the operator, Le., the person or the establishment who would operate the waste treatment facility. 13. In the impugned notification a claim has been made for Consent to Operate. It has been stated that the same is required under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The learned counsel for the respondents has drawn our attention to sections 25 and 64 of the Water (PreveI1tion and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Sub-section (1) of section 25 of the said Act debars a person from establishing or taking steps to establish any industry, operation or process or any treatment and disposal system or any extension or addition thereto, which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land or bring into use any new or altered outlet for the discharge of sewage or begin to make any new discharge of sewage without the previous consent of the State Board. The section is, therefore, prospective, i.e., for taking a new step. The section is, therefore, prospective, i.e., for taking a new step. The proviso thereto, however, makes it abundantly clear that if such an establishment has already been established, when no consent was necessary, such an establishment may continue to run its establishment for a period of 3 months but within that period he has to make an application for consent and if he so applies, he may continue till the disposal of such application. It, therefore, means that if before coming into force of the said Act any such establishment had already been established, then within a period of 3 months from the commencement of the said Act, such establishment has to apply for consent and if after coming into force of the said Act anyone seeks to establish such an establishment, he would be required to obtain previous consent of the State Board. Sub-section (2) of section 25 of the said Act is as follows:- . "An application for consent of the State Board under sub-section (1) shall be made in such form, contain such particulars and shall be accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed." 14. Sub-section (1) of section 64 of the said Act grants power to the State Government to make rules to carry out the purposes of the Act in respect of matters not falling within the purview of section 63, by which power has been granted to the Central Government to make certain specific rules. Sub-section (2) of section 64 of the said Act as example says that the State Government may provide in the rules, inter alia, the form of application for the consent of the State Board under sub-section (2) of section 25 and the particulars it may contain. The power to prescribe the fee under sub-section (2) of section 25 of the said Act, therefore, vests upon the State Government in terms of sub-section (1) of section 64 of the said Act. 15. The power to prescribe the fee under sub-section (2) of section 25 of the said Act, therefore, vests upon the State Government in terms of sub-section (1) of section 64 of the said Act. 15. Similarly under sub-section (1) of section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, no-one is entitled to establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area without previous consent of the State Board and in terms of the proviso thereto if any such plant was in operation before coming into force of the said Act and in particular section 9 thereof he is required to apply within 3 months for a consent of the 9tate Board and if he has so applied, can operate such plant till the disposal of such application. Sub-section (2) of section 21 of the said Act is as follows: "An application for consent of the State Board under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed and shall be made in the prescribed form and shall contain the particulars of the industrial plant and such other particulars as may be prescribed." 16. We are not concerned, for this matter, with the proviso to the said subsection. Section 54 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 specifically authorizes the State Government to make such Rules to carry out the purposes of the said Act and as example makes it clear that such. Rule may prescribe the fees payable in terms of sub-section (2) of section 21 of the said Act. Section 64 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as well as section 54 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 makes it obligatory upon the State Government not to vary or amend or repeal any rule made by the State Government under the provisions of the said Act without consulting the State Board after such Board is constituted. The legislature, therefore, consciously authorized the State Government to prescribe the fee for consent to operate under the said Acts with a corresponding obligation to consult the State Board in that regard after the said Board has already been constituted. 17. The legislature, therefore, consciously authorized the State Government to prescribe the fee for consent to operate under the said Acts with a corresponding obligation to consult the State Board in that regard after the said Board has already been constituted. 17. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as a matter of fact the State Government has not prescribed any such fee but has designated the Pollution Control Board to do so by framing Rules under section 64 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and section 54 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. Those Rules are as follows:- NOTIFICATION No. EN/2385/4W-15/97 Dated December 30, 1999 In exercise of the power conferred by section 64 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (6 of 1974) as amended from time to time, the State Government after consultation with the West Bengal Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as the State Board) hereby makes the following rules in super-session of the existing rules notified from time to time under relevant sections of the Act. 1. Short title and commencement- (1) These rules may be called the West Bengal Prevention & Control of Water Pollution (From of Application for Consent of the State Board) Rules, 1999. (2) They shall come into force with effect from the date their publication in Official Gazette. 2. (1) On receipt of an application for consent, the State Board may process the consent application as per the procedure specified by the State Board from time to time. (2) An application for consent shall be accompanied by such fees as may be specified by the State Board with prior consent of the State Government from time to time. (3) Any consent application not accompanied by the specified fees shall be entertained by the State Board. (4) Fees specified by the State Board shall be paid in favo1ir of the ' State Board in a manner as may be specified by the State Board. (5) An application for consent shall be in such form as may be specified by the State Board from time to time provided that nothing shall prevent the State Board from specifying a common form to deal with Consents under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. (6) The consent shall remain valid for such period as may be fixed by the State Board. (6) The consent shall remain valid for such period as may be fixed by the State Board. 3. The form A as specified in the existing rules shall stand omitted." NOTIFICATION No. EN/2383/4W-15/97 Dated December 3D, 1999 In exercise of powers conferred by section 54 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (14 of 1981) the Governor after consultation with the West Bengal Pollution Control Board hereby makes the following rules: 1. Short title and commencement- (1) These rules may be called Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Amendment Rules, 1999. (2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. In section 10 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the principal rules), i) for sub-section (1) the following sub-section shall be substituted. (1) An application for obtaining the Consent of the State Board for bringing into use any new or altered chimney for emission of or continuing existing emission from chimney under section 21 shall be made to the State Board in a form to be specified by the Board from time to time provided that nothing shall prevent the State Board from specifying a common form to deal with Consent under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. (ii) for sub-section (2) the following sub-section shall be substituted. (2) Such applications shall be accompanied by fees to be specified by the State Board with prior consent of the State Government. (iii) From I as specified in the principal rules shall stand omitted." 18. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that after the State Government by the rules, as mentioned above, authorized the State Board to prescribe the fees, the State Board has prescribed the fees for Consent to Operate as mentioned in the impugned notification. 19. By the Acts, namely, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 the legislature has empowered the State Government to make Rules to carry out the purposes of the said Acts without imposing any limitation. The State Government has made the aforementioned Rules accordingly and therein has designated the Pollution Control Board as the authority to prescribe the applicable fees. There is nothing wrong in that. The State Government has made the aforementioned Rules accordingly and therein has designated the Pollution Control Board as the authority to prescribe the applicable fees. There is nothing wrong in that. That designated authority has prescribed the fee. Such prescription, therefore, is not unauthorized. 20. But, then, fixing of the fees for authorization on the basis of capital investment, as appears from the impugned notification, does not seem to be proper. An establishment established with much lesser capital investment may create more water and air pollution than an industry established with a larger investment. The fact that Pollution Control Plants themselves are capital intensive has not been taken into consideration. Furthermore, in terms of the provisions of the said Acts, the State Board has many other functions and obligations apart from granting sanction. Those are in the nature of governmental duties and accordingly the Government has been obliged to fund the State Board. Their fund to discharge such obligation are not dependent only on the fees as appears to be in the case of prescribed authority to be constituted under the Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998. The application for Consent to Operate is to be accompanied by the prescribed fee. Once an application is made and consent is granted, until such time the consent is revoked, the consent remains. It, therefore, does not appear that even after applying for consent by paying the prescribed fee therefore and after obtaining consent in terms of such application, the person so applying may be made liable to pay fees year after year. No such obligation has been cast by the said Acts. No such obligation can be cast by the Rules framed to give effect to the said Acts. No such obligation can be cast by an authority designated to prescribe the fees payable under the said Acts. That would tantamount to creating a new obligation, which is not permissible. 21. For the reasons, as aforesaid, we strike down the impugned notification. 22. No such obligation can be cast by an authority designated to prescribe the fees payable under the said Acts. That would tantamount to creating a new obligation, which is not permissible. 21. For the reasons, as aforesaid, we strike down the impugned notification. 22. This will, however, not absolve the Pollution Control Board from discharging its obligations as the State Board under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as well as under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and as prescribed authority under the Bio-medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 merely because fees to accompany the application for consent have not been prescribed as yet in terms of the said Act and fees to accompany the grant of authorization have not been prescribed under the said Rules and similarly the members of the petitioner No. 1 cannot avoid their obligations under the said Acts and the said Rules merely because the fees have not been prescribed as yet. Since the fees have not yet been prescribed the applications must be made as required under the said Acts and the said Rules without fees and thereupon steps are to be taken as provided for in the said Acts and the said rules. 23. Before parting it is necessary to point out that payment of conservancy charges to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation by the members of the petitioner No.1 cannot absolve the petitioners of the rigors of the said Rules unless it is shown and established that the Calcutta Municipal Corporation has obtained due authorization for receiving, storing and transporting such waste and has also been duly authorized to operate bio-medical waste treatment facility under the said Rules and such authorized treatment facility is such that the same is capable of handling the bio-medical waste generated by each of the members of the petitioner No. 1. 24. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 25. There shall be no order as to costs. Writ petition disposed of.