Judgment :- V.K. Bali, C.J. All Kerala River Protection Council, petitioner herein, said to be a charitable society working for the protection of environment of the country, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to be issued to the respondents to take immediate steps to stop all illegal excavation of earth in Kadungallore Grama Panchayat and to take necessary action to fill up the said lands which were already digged in contravention of the conditions and also to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Kerala State Pollution Control Board to take immediate action for stoppage and prosecution against the brick makers which are functioning without complying with the conditions laid down in Schedule I Item 74 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. While giving narration of facts, it has been averred in the petition that excavation of agricultural land for extracting clay for brick making is common in the Kadungallore Grama Panchayat. On 29.9.1993, the agriculturists of the area filed a mass petition before the Revenue Divisional Officer complaining about the mass excavation of earth in the “Ummarathapadam Padasekharam” and the proposed excavation of land in “Mundakan Padam”. The then Revenue Divisional Officer passed an order restraining the digging of paddy land, vide order dated 15.2.1995. Against the order aforesaid, an appeal was filed before the Board of Revenue and that authority vide order dated 24.02.1998 rejected the appeal. The said order, it is stated, was easily got over by the brick makers of the said Panchayat and other nearby Panchayats. The problem of such excavation of earth beyond the prescribed level has been brought to the notice of this Court and by judgment dated 19th February, 2001 in O.P.No.34220 of 2000 this Court issued the following directions:- “i. The State of Kerala is directed to look into the relevant aspects and to issue directions to ensure that there is no unrestricted or deleterious digging up of paddy and other lands all over the State in the name of extraction of clay or mud of earth for manufacturing or other purposes. ii. The Geological Department is directed to ensure that no permissions are granted under the Mines Act or Minor Mineral Concession Rules, for digging up of paddy lands or other lands without restrictions. ii. The Geological Department is directed to ensure that no permissions are granted under the Mines Act or Minor Mineral Concession Rules, for digging up of paddy lands or other lands without restrictions. The Geological Department is also directed to consider what should be the optimum level to which a field can be dug up without impairing its utility as regards the use to which it is at the relevant time put and to impose such restrictions on the licence or permission to be issued under the Mines Act or the Minor Mineral Concession Rules. iii. The Collectors of the districts and the concerned Revenue Divisional Officers are directed to ensure that there is no indiscriminate digging up of paddy lands and other lands in the concerned district and ensure that directions to be issued by this Court are strictly implemented. iv. All the Panchayats in the State are directed not to issue any license for manufacture or production or bricks or other articles out of mud, clay or earth unless the person who applies for license specifies in the application, the source from which he proposes to obtain clay, earth or mud. On such disclosure being made, the Panchayat will verify the lands specified and only thereafter grant licenses or permissions under the Panchayat Raj Act for starting or running any industry or manufacture or process based on clay, earth or mud and bearing in mind the relevant laws including the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. v. There will be a direction to the State, the Collectors of District and the Revenue Divisional Officers not to permit digging for the purpose of extraction of clay, earth or mud for manufacture of bricks, tiles and the like, or for filling up of other lands near public roads, railway tracks and near other places which would affect public safety or where the members of the public generally gather”. Thereafter removing of earth was stopped for certain period. Thereafter, however, it continued. In the meanwhile, the Government of India has also issued certain directions. The Environment Protection Rules prescribe the emission standards for brick kilns. For achieving emission standards fixed chimneys are also required. Stack height restrictions are also imposed. All the existing chimneys have to dispense with the present practice by 30th June, 2002. The units are bound to furnish bank guarantees depending on the number of bricks manufactured. The Environment Protection Rules prescribe the emission standards for brick kilns. For achieving emission standards fixed chimneys are also required. Stack height restrictions are also imposed. All the existing chimneys have to dispense with the present practice by 30th June, 2002. The units are bound to furnish bank guarantees depending on the number of bricks manufactured. The same is as below:- “74. Emission Standards for brick-kilns: I. Minimal National Emission Standards for Brick Kilns: Note: 1. The above particulate matter emission limits are achievable by installing fixed chimney high draught kilns and/or settling chamber. II. Stack Height Regulation: The following stack heights are recommended for optional dispersion of particulate matter:- III. Existing moving chimney bull’s trench kilns shall be dispensed with by 30th June 2002 and no new moving chimney kilns shall be allowed to come up; Provided that only those brick kilns shall be given extension of time who shall furnish affidavits to the concerned authority in the State giving approval for brick kilns to the effect that the prescribed standards shall be complied by them by 30th June, 2002; and no further extension of time shall be sought by them; Provided further that the units shall submit a bank guarantee for the amount specified below, to the respective State Pollution Control Board for completing the conversion within the prescribed time frame and in case of non-compliance of the said directions, the amount of bank guarantee shall be forfeited. -- Large scale brick kilns (more than 30,00 bricks per day) Rs.30,000 -- Medium scale brick kilns Rs.20,000 (between 15,000 to 30,000 bricks Per day). -- Small scale brick kilns Rs.10,000 (less than 15,000 bricks per day)”. The case of the petitioner is that the brick makers in the Kadungallore Grama Panchayat have not complied with the conditions laid down by the Environmental Protection Rules as stated above. The brick units are not having the prescribed stack height and chimneys. They have not even furnished bank guarantee. They are digging the paddy lands upto a depth of 30 feet in certain places. For the purpose of fuel, they add tyres and other substances which causes severe air pollution in the area. Complaints were lodged about the illegal excavation of earth before the 1st respondent by the residents and the petitioner organization. The 1st respondent vide order dated 30.12.2005 has restrained all the brick making activities in the Kadungallore Grama Panchayat. For the purpose of fuel, they add tyres and other substances which causes severe air pollution in the area. Complaints were lodged about the illegal excavation of earth before the 1st respondent by the residents and the petitioner organization. The 1st respondent vide order dated 30.12.2005 has restrained all the brick making activities in the Kadungallore Grama Panchayat. Despite restrictions, illegal excavation of earth and brick making is going on for the sole reason that authorities are closing their eyes to the illegal activities. Indiscriminate digging of land near public roads causes hazards during the monsoon days. It gets filled up with water and people falling in it are getting drowned. About 50 persons have died in the said area by falling in the pit being created by the brick manufacturers. It is in the wake of the facts as mentioned above, the relief as mentioned earlier have been asked for. 2. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, respondents entered appearance. The 1st respondent filed a written statement, wherein it has been pleaded that complaints were received by the District Collector regarding the excavation of clay and functioning of unauthorized brick units and a direction was issued to the Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat to submit a report on the complaint. The Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat submitted a report on 12.12.2005. The Panchayat authorities had not given permits for either ordinary sand mining or licence to any person after 1.4.2003. The Panchayat had given licence to six persons during the year 2002-2003 for operating the brick manufacturing units and the validity of the above licences had expired on 31.3.2003. These licences were given on the basis that the clay already stocked and brought from outside alone can be used. As per the instruction of the Ombudsman, the Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat has issued stop memo to 23 persons who were conducting unauthorized manufacturing units of bricks. In addition to this, the secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat has informed the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Aluva, Circle Inspector of Police, Aluva and the Sub Inspector of Police, Binanipuram for taking stringent action against the unauthorized brick manufacturing units operating in violation of he stop memo issued. The Secretary has also reported that 23 brick units are working unauthorisedly in that area. The Secretary has also reported that 23 brick units are working unauthorisedly in that area. After getting a report from the Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat regarding the operation of unauthorized brick units, the District Collector vide order dated 30.12.2005 banned the brick making activities in Kadungallore Panchayat. A direction was also issued to the Additional Tahsildar, Paravoor and Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat to enforce the aforesaid order with the assistance of police. While so, the brick owners in Kadungallore Grama Panchayat have prayed for limited permission for manufacturing bricks using the clay already stocked there. The matter was referred to Tahsildar, Paravoor for enquiry and comprehensive report. The Tahsildar in his report recommended to accord sanction to the owners of the brick units who have already stocked clay for the manufacturing of bricks. He has furnished a list of owners of the brick units and the quantity of clay kept with them. In view of the recommendation, the District Collector passed orders for temporary operation of the above brick units subject to certain conditions. Pursuant to the order of the District Collector, the Secretary, Kadungallore Grama Panchayat has issued permits to the brick owners who have already stocked clay. In Kadungallore Panchayat only seven brick units are functioning. Enquiries revealed that in Alangad Village four brick units are working. The Additional Tahsildar, Paravoor has reported that stop memo has been issued to these brick units since they were excavating clay from the paddy field itself. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi has been directed to have special attention to Kadungallore Panchayat for curbing illegal excavation of clay from paddy field. The District Collector has taken all effective steps to curb the unauthorized operation of brick units and excavation of clay from paddy field. 3. It appears that the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ despite an order dated 15.2.1995 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer restraining the digging of paddy land, against which the appeal filed was also dismissed on 24.2.1998, and also directions issued by this Court on 19.2.2001 as also the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 30.12.2005, the concerned authorities were not taking steps to stop manufacturing of bricks in the paddy field in the concerned area. The 1st respondent in the written statement filed has explained the position as to why it became necessary to give breathing time to the brick-kiln owners so that the clay collected by them for manufacturing brick is not wasted. As of now, it appears that there is no activity of manufacturing bricks in the concerned area. The petitioner, it appears, is satisfied with the steps taken by the respondents. Be that as it may, we also direct the respondents to ensure that no brick manufacturing would take place in the paddy fields in the concerned area after the clay collected by the brick-kiln owners has been consumed. It is understood that by now the brick owners must have consumed the clay and that being so, no further manufacturing of brick would take place in the paddy fields in the area under reference. 4. When the matter came up for hearing on 7th of June, 2006, learned counsel representing the petitioner stated that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Pollution Control Board to ensure that emission standards are fulfilled by the brick-kiln owners. The 4th respondent had not given any reply with regard to contents of paragraph 4 of the writ petition, where complaint was with regard to emission standards for brick-kilns, for which standards have been fixed as stated in paragraph 4. The Court recorded the following order dated aforesaid: “Learned counsel appearing for the Pollution Control Board seeks time for filing an affidavit of the responsible officer so as to meet the averments contained in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. List again on 19.6.2006.” Pursuant to the directions contained in the order aforesaid, the Member Secretary, Kerala State Pollution Control Board has placed on record a report dated 14.06.2006, where it has inter alia been mentioned that brick kilns in Kerala are usually small scale units of the clamp type. Those are intermittently operated and work seasonally. No emission standards have so far been prescribed for such kilns by the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The Central Pollution Control Board is understood to be contemplating a study of such kilns as a preclude for evolving pollution control measures for those. Standards were prescribed in the Environment (Protection) Rules vide notification dated 2.4.1996 and were amended vide orders dated 5.10.1999 and 22.1.2002. The Central Pollution Control Board is understood to be contemplating a study of such kilns as a preclude for evolving pollution control measures for those. Standards were prescribed in the Environment (Protection) Rules vide notification dated 2.4.1996 and were amended vide orders dated 5.10.1999 and 22.1.2002. The said standards are applicable only for continuous kilns such as bulls trench kilns, fixed chimney kilns, hoffman kilns and CBRI high draught kilns. As the brick kilns in Kerala are of the clamp type, the Central Pollution Control Board was addressed regarding control measures to be adopted by clamp type kilns. The Central Pollution Control Board informed that the Environment (Protection) standards were not applicable to the clamp type brick kilns that were largely in existence in Kerala and they had initiated action for evolving standards for clamp type kilns. It is then mentioned that though the pollution potential of the intermittent clamp type kilns is less than the continuous type kilns, the kilns were giving rise to complaints where they were existing near residential areas. The Board, therefore, evolved standards for emission control from clamp type brick kilns in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 17(1)(j) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and as per these standards, the following conditions are insisted during grant of consent to brick kilns. “a. As far as possible, brick manufacturing units of temporary types shall be consented to be established/operated in a sparingly populated area. That is, there shall not be any residence, institution or worship centre within 100 m. radial distance. b. In case of residence within 100m. Radius of the brick kiln, the kiln shall be provided with temporary covering with suitable material on all the sides upto the top of the kiln during the firing and burning stages in order to minimize the spreading of smoke at or near ground level. Arrangement for adequate draft should also be provided. c. The contention of suspended particulate matter in ambient air measured at a distance of 40m. Away from the centre of the kiln shall not exceed 600 micro gram/cubic metre. d. Kilns with 100 m. (centre to centre) should not be fired simultaneously.” 5. Arrangement for adequate draft should also be provided. c. The contention of suspended particulate matter in ambient air measured at a distance of 40m. Away from the centre of the kiln shall not exceed 600 micro gram/cubic metre. d. Kilns with 100 m. (centre to centre) should not be fired simultaneously.” 5. From the pleadings of parties as extracted above, it would appear that whereas the petitioner would emphasise that the emission standards for brick kilns have been laid down as provided in item No.74 of Schedule I, re-produced above, the respondents would depend upon standards prescribed in the Environment (Protection) Rules as per notification dated 2.4.1996 as amended by orders dated 5.10.1999 and 22.1.2002, wherein standards with regard to brick kilns in Kerala have been provided as required according to the availability of soil in the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants are prescribed for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of environment as per the provisions contained in Rule 3 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. With a view to appreciate the contention of the learned counsel it shall be useful to re-produce Rule 3, which, in so far as it is relevant for the purpose of deciding the question involved in the case, reads as follows:- “3. Standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants:- (1) For the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing a abating environmental pollution, the standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from the industries, operations or processes shall be as specified in Schedules I to IV. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the Central Board or a State Board may specify more stringent standards from those provided in Schedules I to IV in respect of any specific industry, operation or process depending upon the quality of the recipient system and after recording reasons, therefore, in writing. (3) The standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants specified under sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (2) shall be complied with by an industry, operation or process within a period of one year of being so specified. (3) The standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants specified under sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (2) shall be complied with by an industry, operation or process within a period of one year of being so specified. (3A)(i) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (1) and (2), on and from the 1st day of January, 1994, emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from the industries, operations or processes other than those industries, operations or processes for which standards have been specified in Schedule I shall not exceed the relevant parameters and standards specified in Schedule VI: Provided that the State Boards may specify more stringent standards for the relevant parameters with respect to specific industry or locasions after recording reasons thereof in writing; (ii) The State Board shall while enforcing the standards specified in Schedule VI follow the guidelines specified in Annexures I and II in that Schedule. (3B) The combined effect of emission or discharge environmental pollutants in an area, from industries, operations, processes, automobiles and domestic sources, shall not be permitted to exceed the relevant concentration in ambient air as specified against each pollutant in columns (3) to (5) of Schedule VII”. A bare reading of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1986 would manifest that emission or discharge of environmental pollutants has to be as per the standards specified in Schedule I. Whereas, the Board may specify more stringent standards from those provided in Schedules I to IV, it shall not be permissible to reduce such standard. 6. Vide order dated 27th June, 2006, we impleaded the Central Pollution Board, on the request made by the counsel for the petitioner as a party respondent, through its Member Secretary. When confronted with the provisions contained in Rule 3 of Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, the learned counsel representing the respondents has nothing to urge. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1986 has not been controverted. 7. When confronted with the provisions contained in Rule 3 of Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, the learned counsel representing the respondents has nothing to urge. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1986 has not been controverted. 7. Having taken into consideration the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the provisions contained in Rule 3 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, we hereby direct the Central Pollution Control Board, who has been impleaded as a party respondent, to give a second look to the Circular issued by it, mention whereof has been made above, dealing with emission standards for brick kilns in Kerala in the light of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1986 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from today. The writ petition is disposed of in the manner as indicated above.