HC seeks pollution board’s response in Dehradun stone crusher case

Dehradun: A division bench of the Uttarakhand high court, comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay, on Wednesday directed the State Pollution Control Board (PCB) and the department of industries to file their responses within six weeks in a matter concerning the Sai Krupa Stone Crusher in Bhimawala, Vikasnagar, Dehradun, which is alleged to be operating in violation of regulations. The next hearing has been scheduled for July 22.During the hearing, the state govt submitted that a stone crusher can be established within a residential area, as the applicable regulations contain a provision permitting such a facility if local residents grant a no-objection certificate (NOC). On an earlier date, the court had vacated the interim stay imposed on the project.According to the petition, filed by resident Skand Kumar Singh, the Sai Krupa Stone Crusher is located near a densely populated area, a govt intermediate college, an anganwadi centre and a gram panchayat office, allegedly in violation of existing norms.The petitioner further contended that the unit falls within a prohibited 200m zone and that its operation would adversely affect the environment as well as the health of residents and school-going children. The plea also alleged non-compliance with guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in July 2023.During the initial hearing, the court found the allegations “prima facie serious” and stayed both the construction and operation of the crusher unit, observing that it was not situated within a designated zone and appeared to be functioning contrary to CPCB guidelines.The owner of Sai Krupa Stone Crusher subsequently sought vacation of the stay order, following which the matter reached the Supreme Court. The apex court directed the HC to hear the case expeditiously and pass appropriate orders.Pursuant to the court’s directions, the PCB and several expert committees conducted multiple site inspections. Their reports stated that the crusher’s production capacity, air quality and noise levels were “within prescribed limits”. Tests carried out by a three-member committee between Feb 16 and 18 found that the unit’s operations “complied with regulatory standards” and that “pollution levels remained within permissible limits even during trial runs”.The crusher owner informed the court that the unit had obtained a lease in 2024 and operational permission in 2025 and was already functioning before the present petition was filed. It was further argued that the CPCB guidelines were not binding in nature and, therefore, the stay order should be vacated and the PIL dismissed.