Rajinder Gupta's Factory Raided By Punjab PCB Soon After He Switched To BJP From AAP : P&H High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the apprehension of political vendetta behind a raid conducted by the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) on Trident Limited appears “reasonably palpable”, noting the proximity of the action to the change in political allegiance of the company's Chairman Emeritus.

It was alleged by Trident Limited that PPCB raided the factory after owner of the Company— MP Rajinder Gupta, left the Aam Aadmi Party to join the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry noted, "an issue which deserves consideration is that of the timing of the raid conducted on 30.04.2026 by a team of officers of respondent No.2/Board, which is in close proximity to the switching of political allegiance by Sh. Rajinder Gupta (Chairman Emeritus of the petitioner Company) from Aam Aadmi Party to Bhartiya Janta Party along with six other members of Rajya Sabha on 24.04.2026."

By applying the wednesbury principle, the apprehension in the mind of the petitioner Company that the raid conducted by respondent No.2/Board on 30.04.2026 stems from political vendetta, appears reasonably palpable, added the Court.

The petition was filed by Trident Limited seeking to restrain authorities from taking coercive action pursuant to a raid conducted on April 30, 2026, by officials of the Punjab Pollution Control Board. The company also sought a direction for testing of seized samples at a central laboratory outside Punjab, alleging mala fides and absence of prior notice.

The Company contended that the raid was politically motivated, pointing to the fact that its Chairman Emeritus, Rajinder Gupta, had switched allegiance from the Aam Aadmi Party to the Bharatiya Janata Party on April 24, 2026, shortly before the inspection.

Opposing the plea, the State and the PPCB argued that the petition was not maintainable in view of the availability of an alternative remedy before the National Green Tribunal under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Reliance was also placed on Rule 32(6) of the Punjab Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1977, which permits issuance of directions without prior hearing in emergent situations involving likely grave environmental harm.

After examining the submissions, the Court refrained from adjudicating the substantive issues. However, it found that the timing of the raid, just days after the political switch, gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of mala fide action when tested on the anvil of the Wednesbury principle.

The Court further observed that the Board had failed to demonstrate any emergent situation involving imminent environmental damage that would justify dispensing with prior notice. In such circumstances, it held that coercive steps should be taken only after affording the company a reasonable opportunity of 30 days to rectify any deficiencies.

Accordingly, the Court directed that the PPCB may proceed in accordance with law, but only after granting the petitioner a 30-day window. It also granted liberty to the company to approach the National Green Tribunal under Section 33B(c) of the Water Act in case any coercive action is taken under Section 33A.

Ms. Munisha Gandhi, Senior Advocate (arguing counsel) with Mr. Viraj Gandhi and Mr. Adarsh K. Dubey, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. Maninderjit S. Bedi, Advocate General Punjab (arguing counsel) with Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. Dy. Advocate General Punjab and Ms. Kavita Joshi, Advocate for the respondent/State.

Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Senior Advocate (arguing counsel) with Mr. A.S. Chadha, Advocate for respondent No.2/PPCB.

Title: Trident Limited v. State of Punjab & another

Click here to read order