J UDGMENT : Ashutosh Kumar, CJ. We have heard Mrs. D. Ghosh, assisted by Mr. H.K. Chakma, learned Advocates for the petitioners; Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. A. Das, for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 and Mr. S. Baruah, learned Advocate for the Pollution Control Board, Assam (respondent No.6). 2. The present petition has been filed by the concerned residents highlighting the environmental and public health hazards, which have been caused by M/s Brahmaputra Carbon Limited, a Company incorporated in the year 1996. 3. The Factory in question appears to have been set up at Dolaigaon under Bongaigaon Police Station in Bongaigaon District, Assam, which is described as purely residential area. 4. According to the petitioners, the operation of the said Company/Factory has resulted in serious environmental degradation and has adversely affected the health of people living in the vicinity. The Company/Factory reportedly discharges harmful pollutants in the surrounding environment, thereby creating air and possibly water pollution. Despite continuous and multiple complaints lodged by the local residents over a period of time, no action has been taken. It has also been submitted that on 03.02.2022, the petitioners had submitted a formal representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Bongaigaon, urging constitution of an Expert Team to investigate the functioning and environmental impact of the Company/ Factory, but no action was taken on this representation. 5. The inaction of the authorities, it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is arbitrary and in violation of the statutory obligations. So far as the evidence of harmful impact because of the running of the Company/Factory is concerned, the petitioners have drawn the attention of this Court to the news reports and some visuals displayed on public platforms regarding the suffering of the local populace because of the harmful effect of the emissions from the Company/Factory in question. 6. The petitioner laments that despite the existence of comprehensive environmental protection laws, like Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, the plight of the residents nearby have not been redressed. 7. This is attributable to be a lethargic and ambivalent approach of the authorities. The petitioner laments that despite the existence of comprehensive environmental protection laws, like Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, the plight of the residents nearby have not been redressed. 7. This is attributable to be a lethargic and ambivalent approach of the authorities. Such environmental hazard, it has been argued, is counter to Article 21 of the Constitution, which provides right to life which includes within it the right to a clean and healthy environment. The complaints, it has been further asserted on behalf of the petitioners, has been left unaddressed because of lack of enforcement by the authorities in reporting the matter or monitoring and regulating and thereafter taking corrective measures against any polluting Company/Factory. 8. This Court had called for an affidavit from the respondent No.6/Pollution Control Board, Assam, to respond to the afore-noted allegations. 9. The affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.6, however, indicates that the accusation made in the petition is absolutely incorrect. There has been no adverse impact because of the running of M/s Brahmaputra Carbon Limited. In fact, the Pollution Control Board had been regularly monitoring the level of pollution created by the Company/Factory in question but the reports indicate otherwise. The analysis report of the Stock Emission Monitoring done by the Board officials on 06.04.2022 reveals that the emission parameters are under the permissible limits. The Company/Factory was commissioned in the year 2004 for the purposes of production of Calcinated Petrolium Coke. For arresting the particulate matters emitting during the production process, pollution control equipments, like Venture Scrubber has been installed in the plant. Dust Collectors with Chimneys have also been installed by the Unit to arrest the dust particulates at the source. Even the emission of gases, the report indicates, are within the permissible limits as fixed by the Central Pollution Control Board. 10. So far as the accusation of the Company having been set up in a residential area is concerned, the petitioners do not press it, as admittedly, it has been set up in an industrial zone after all clearances from the concerned authorities. 11. 10. So far as the accusation of the Company having been set up in a residential area is concerned, the petitioners do not press it, as admittedly, it has been set up in an industrial zone after all clearances from the concerned authorities. 11. The affidavit of the respondent No.6 further indicates that only after being satisfied that the latest Pollution Control Measures/Devices have been installed by the Company/Factory for effective control of pollution, the “consent to operate” was given and this is not a one-time measure. An yearly assessment is made and in case it is found that there is any emission of gas or pollutant, which has crossed the approved parameters, necessary action shall be taken. 12. Though in response to the afore-noted affidavit, the petitioners got a survey conducted, wherein it was found that the residents of the locality have been starkly distressed because of emissions from the Company/ Factory. It has also been urged on behalf of the petitioners that the fact that there is an Anganwadi Centre and a School situated nearby has made the situation even more alarming, which can be objectionably verified. 13. The already fragile atmosphere around the area has been made worse. 14. However, even after having said that, Ms. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioners, admitted that setting up and running of a Company/ Factory in the zone dedicated for setting up of such factories/companies is also beneficial for the employment of the local people. In fact most of the local people are engaged in the afore-noted Company/Factory, which has a very high productive capacity. Shutting down the said Company/Factory would be counter-productive. 15. However, what Ms. Ghosh desires this Court to direct that the Pollution Control Board keeps on monitoring the Company/Factory at regular intervals and ensure that all the restrictions for operating the Unit are continuously respected by the Management of the Company/Factory, like maintaining a green-belt in and around the Company/ Factory. She has further suggested that if in the nearby School, a green-belt could be established with the initiative of the Company/Factory, it would only reduce the impact of atmospheric degradation. 16. She has further suggested that if in the nearby School, a green-belt could be established with the initiative of the Company/Factory, it would only reduce the impact of atmospheric degradation. 16. Another suggestion made on behalf of the petitioners is that while doing regular health check-ups of the employees of the Company/Factory, if such health check-ups could be done of the students of the nearby School, it would go a long way in mitigating the harmful effects of pollution on the students/residents. 17. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, who has appeared for the respondent Nos.3 & 4, i.e. M/s The Brahmaputra Carbon Limited, readily agreed that if at all it is indicated that any green-belt has to be set up in a nearby School or in the Anganwadi Centre, which could be used by the children of the locality, the Company/Factory would be more than willing to initiate that process and have such green-belt set up. The learned senior counsel for the Company/Factory also agreed to act upon the suggestion of the learned counsel for the petitioner for regular health check-ups of the students of the nearby School/Anganwadi Centre. 18. Louise Erdrich Bigogress, an environmentalist has very rightly observed that “grass and sky are two canvases into which the rich details of the earth are drawn”. 19. The Courts of the land have always paid special attention to the problems of air pollution, water pollution and environmental degradation and have passed number of directions and orders to ensure that environment, ecology and wildlife are saved, preserved and protected. All this has been done because of the Court’s interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution expansively, incorporating in it the right to have the enjoyment of quality of life and a clean environment. [Also refer to – M.C. Mehta -Vs- Union of India & Ors., (1988) 1 SCC 471 ; Subhash Kumar -Vs- State of Bihar & Ors., (1991) 1 SCC 598 ; Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum -Vs- Union of India & Ors., (1996) 5 SCC 647 ; A.P. Pollution Control Board -Vs- Professor M.V. Nayadu (Retd.) & Ors., (1999) 2 SCC 718 and Essar Oil Limited -Vs- Halar Utkarsh Samiti, (2004) 2 SCC 392 , etc.] 20. The petitioners have made laudable efforts at bringing to the notice of this Court the difficulties of the residents and the adverse impact of running of the Company/Factory. 21. The petitioners have made laudable efforts at bringing to the notice of this Court the difficulties of the residents and the adverse impact of running of the Company/Factory. 21. However, the question remains as to whether shutting down the Company/Factory or shifting it to another place would be viable. 22. As noted above, the Company/Factory has been set up in a special zone meant for establishment of such Factories/Companies and the laws controlling the pollution have been adhered to. The affidavit of the Pollution Control Board makes it very obvious that all safeguards have been followed. 23. The Company/Factory has also agreed to develop a green-belt in the nearby Anganwadi Centre and the School, which would only facilitate the children of the locality to have some green space for them to breathe and play. 24. We, therefore, find it appropriate now to close this petition with a direction to the respondent/Pollution Control Board, Assam to keep on monitoring and making impact assessment at regular intervals and in case of pollutants/emissions going beyond the prescribed parameters, take action immediately, as provided under the relevant Statutes/Acts. We would appreciate if an effort is taken by the Company/Factory at the earliest for establishing a green-belt in the Anganwadi Centre and the School. We would also appreciate if, at the time of doing regular health check-ups of its employees, the Company/ Factory also takes requisite steps for regular health check-ups of the students of the nearby School/Anganwadi Centre. 25. This Court hopes and trusts that with such measures, the people of the area would have some respite. We have said so also for the reason that there is no dispute about the fact that most of the local persons have found their employment in the Company/Factory in question. 26. With the above observations and directions, the Public Interest Litigation stands disposed off.