The Bombay High Court has stayed orders directing the closure of industrial units operated by CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. and Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd., observing that shutting down the factories during the festive season would affect thousands of families dependent on their operations for their livelihood. The Court granted interim protection primarily on account of the lack of an opportunity of hearing and the premature timing of the action.

Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar was hearing two separate writ petitions challenging closure orders passed by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, read with Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

In the CG Power matter, the MPCB had directed closure of the company's industrial unit through an order dated November 3, 2026, along with disconnection of its electricity and water supply. This was done as a consequence of an inspection that had identified certain deficiencies in the operations of the company. The company contended that it had already taken the required steps to address the relevant deficiencies. In the second petition, the MPCB had passed a closure order on November 4, 2026, directing the company to stop all manufacturing activities until further orders.

Both the companies contended that if the impugned orders are not stayed during the pendency of the Writ Petition, it would hamper the industries as well as the employees.

The Court noted that while an order under Section 31A of the Air Act carries an appellate remedy under Section 31, no such remedy is available against an order under Section 33A of the Water Act. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board v. Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd., the Bench noted that the Supreme Court had left open the option of approaching the High Court through a writ petition.

Considering CG Power's case, the Court observed that no show-cause notice appeared to have been directly served on the company and that the closure order did not record such service. It also noted that the deficiencies identified did not prima facie appear sufficient to justify closure of the entire unit.

“… the Petitioner has already deposited the Bank Guarantee as was directed as interim order. The rest of the objection- although base on technical aspect, yet in view of the nature of the explanation as regards to certain industrial process, must not be sufficient to direct closure of the industrial unit itself,” the Court remarked.

In Goodyear's case, the Court observed that the MPCB had renewed the company's Consent to Operate after issuing the show-cause notice and receiving its response. It prima facie found that the action appeared premature, particularly since the company seemed to have time to address any remaining deficiencies.

The Court further noted that both industrial units were situated in an industrial area near Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and employed thousands of people. It observed that although the companies might ultimately fail to establish their cases on merits, shutting down the industries during the festive season would affect the livelihoods of thousands of families.

“The Petitioners may succeed or may fail to convince the Court on their merit at the conclusion of the hearing. They may even be penalized financially and/or the defaulting personnel would be accused for penal offences. However, 'Closure' of the industries in this festive season would break into a cold sweat those thousands of families whose source of earning depends on the operation of those industries,” the Court noted.

Accordingly, the Court stayed the operation and execution of the MPCB's closure orders dated November 3 and 4, 2026

Case Title: CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd. v. The State of Maharashtra [Writ Petition No. 16053 of 2026] & Goodyear South Asia Tyres Private Limited v. Maharashtra Pollution Control Board [Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 36989 of 2026]