The Bombay High Court has ruled that the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) cannot use the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, to limit where an authorised pre-processing unit can operate.

The Court said that the revised circular issued on 15 February 2024 and the addition of Clause 19 to the Consent to Operate (CTO) wrongly restricted the petitioner from doing business across Maharashtra. These restrictions were held to be illegal and in violation of the right to trade and business guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Background:

Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad heard a writ petition filed by the petitioner, which had the necessary approvals to set up and operate a pre-processing plant with a capacity of up to 2,75,000 metric tonnes of hazardous waste per year from industries across Maharashtra.

The petitioner challenged the change in the circular, saying it stopped the company from collecting hazardous waste from major industrial areas and allowed only Respondent No. 4’s facilities to operate there. According to the petitioner, this left it with access to only a very small part of the State and made the business financially unviable.

The Court held that the amended circular was not a mere clarification. Instead, it amounted to an unauthorised exercise of power, as it imposed the terms of a Tripartite Agreement on parties who were not part of that agreement, thereby affecting their legal rights.

 The bench stated, “The Amended Circular dated 15th February 2024 has no sanctity in law and cannot be enforced qua the petitioner-company to curtail its rights to receive the hazardous wastes and other wastes for pre-processing/co-processing from the industries located in the State of Maharashtra. The impugned Circular is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and infringes the right of the petitioner-company under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.”

After examining the Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, 2016, the Court noted that the rules place duties on occupiers and give State Pollution Control Boards the power to supervise and enforce compliance. However, the rules do not give the Board any authority to limit the area in which an approved facility can operate. The judges stressed that a State Pollution Control Board cannot use administrative orders or circulars to defeat the purpose of the law.

“The MPCB is to act within the four corners of the Rules. The field for issuing any Circular, guidelines, etc., is occupied by the Central Government and the MPCB has no jurisdiction to issue a Circular contrary to the provisions under the Rules and to impede the free movement of trade and business,” the Court observed.

The High Court thus invalidated the amended circular of 15 February 2024 and Clause 19 of the CTO dated 12 June 2025, deeming them unlawful, beyond authority, and in violation of Article 19(1)(g).

Order  Awaited.

Case Title: Green Gene Enviro Protection and Infrastructure Limited v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [WRIT PETITION NO.2885 OF 2025]

Appearance: 

Mr. Zal Andhyarujina, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Akanksha Aggrawal i/by Abhishek Mehta a/w Mr. Gaurav Raj Shrawat & Mr. Tushar Khatri, Advocates for the Petitioner. 

Ms. P. H. Kantharia, GP a/w Mr. Vishal Thadani, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the Respondent No.1-State. 

Mr. Jayprakash Sen, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Vishwanath Patil, Ms. Nidhi Chauhan, Advocates for the Respondent No.2-MPCB. 

Mr. Prashant Chavan, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Komal Jadhav & Mr. Meet Vora i/by Navdeep Vora & Associates, Advocates for the Respondent No.3. 

Mr. M. G. Bhangde, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Shyam Dewani, Mr. Sumit Khanna & Mr. Chirag Chanani i/by Dewani Associates, Advocates for the Respondent No.4.