Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — | rti-pollution-control-board-noc [2026/07/22 15:48] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{htmlmetatags> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ====== SPCB Consent (CTE/CTO) stuck? File one RTI ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ : | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center round info 95%> | ||
| + | **Quick Reply:** SPCB Consent (CTE/CTO) stuck? File one RTI — RTI to SPCB Karnataka. 23 days later SPCB replied: site visit done; CTO issued in 14 days. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP info> | ||
| + | **Short version.** **State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) Consent to Establish (CTE) + Consent to Operate (CTO)** — mandatory under **Water Act 1974 §25** + **Air Act 1981 §21**. Categorisation: | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | **SPCB Consent (CTE/CTO) stuck? File one RTI — RTI to SPCB Karnataka. 23 days later SPCB replied: site visit done; CTO issued in 14 days.** | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Real story ===== | ||
| + | Karan applied for SPCB CTO (Orange) for his small unit. //" | ||
| + | |||
| + | RTI to SPCB Karnataka. **23 days later** SPCB replied: site visit done; CTO issued in 14 days. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Statute ===== | ||
| + | - **Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act 1974 §25**. | ||
| + | - **Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act 1981 §21**. | ||
| + | - **Environment Protection Act 1986** + **EIA Notification 2006**. | ||
| + | - §6(1) + §7(1) RTI Act. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Copy-ready RTI ===== | ||
| + | < | ||
| + | To, PIO, [State Pollution Control Board] Regional Office, [Address] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Subject: §6(1) RTI Act — SPCB CTE / CTO application | ||
| + | |||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | Please provide: | ||
| + | 1. Current status + stage. | ||
| + | 2. Site verification date (if conducted) + report. | ||
| + | 3. Reason for delay beyond [120/90/30] day SLA. | ||
| + | 4. Name + designation of dealing AEE/EE. | ||
| + | 5. Document deficiency (if any). | ||
| + | 6. Expected consent issue date. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Citizen. Fee: ₹10 IPO/DD enclosed. | ||
| + | [Name + signature + address + date] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Common scenarios ===== | ||
| + | - Site verification delayed. | ||
| + | - Categorisation dispute (Orange vs Green). | ||
| + | - Annual analysis report (effluent/ | ||
| + | - Renewal beyond expiry — provisional consent. | ||
| + | - Closure consent (CTC) for shutting down. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Case law ===== | ||
| + | - **//Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. UoI//, (1996)** — Polluter pays + precautionary principle. | ||
| + | - CIC //SPCB v. Citizen// (2018) — disclosure of state-wise pendency. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== FAQs ===== | ||
| + | ==== EoDB SLA enforceable? | ||
| + | Yes — central reform binding on SPCBs. | ||
| + | ==== EC vs Consent — different? ==== | ||
| + | EC under EIA Notification 2006; Consent under Water/Air Act. Both may apply. | ||
| + | ==== Auto-renewal? | ||
| + | No — fresh CTO application required. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Conclusion ===== | ||
| + | SPCB delays kill small businesses. RTI + EoDB SLA = unblock. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sources ===== | ||
| + | - Water Act 1974, Air Act 1981, EP Act 1986. | ||
| + | - EoDB Reforms 2018. | ||
| + | - //Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. UoI// (1996). | ||
| + | |||
| + | //Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.// | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== 🔗 Related guides ===== | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{tag> | ||