PHC halts operation of Kohat Cement coal power plant pending EPA approval

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has temporarily barred Kohat Cement Company from running its coal-fired power plant in Kohat district while hearing a petition by residents who say the project threatens public health and the environment.

A bench comprising Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Inamullah Khan also authorised the deputy director (legal) of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Environmental Protection Agency to form an inspection team for the plant under the relevant laws, rules and standard operating procedures. The court directed Deputy Director Mumtaz Ali to submit the inspection report within a fortnight and fixed July 30 for the next hearing.

In its order, the bench said:

In the meanwhile, till the next date of hearing, respondent Kohat Cement Company shall not operate the coal power plant without obtaining the requisite post-operational approval from the Environmental Protection Agency and shall, in any event, remain bound by any further orders passed by this Court,

Residents challenge legality of project

The petition was filed by Mohammad Irfan and other residents of Babri Banda in Kohat. They asked the court to declare the construction of the coal power plant illegal and unconstitutional, arguing that it violates their fundamental rights as well as Pakistan’s statutory and international obligations. They also sought to have any no-objection certificate or permission granted for the project declared unlawful and set aside.

The petitioners further requested a permanent restraint order against the government and the company from establishing, constructing or operating the coal power plant in Village Babri Banda. In addition, they asked for a comprehensive, independent and transparent Environmental Impact Assessment with effective public participation under Section 13 of the KP Environmental Protection Act, 2014, before any industrial expansion is undertaken.

They also sought the formation of an independent expert commission made up of environmental scientists, medical professionals and civil society representatives to evaluate the health and environmental effects of both the existing cement plant and the coal power project on the local population.

Arguments before the court

Counsel for the petitioners, Ali Gohar Durrani, told the court that the company was building the coal power plant on its premises to supply electricity to its industrial unit. He argued that the site was surrounded by residential neighbourhoods and that the project would affect both the environment and the health of people living nearby.

He further contended that the project had already started operating and was causing pollution above the limits allowed under environmental laws. Earlier, he argued that placing a coal power plant within 200 metres of a residential area was against public health and safety standards and infringed on the petitioners’ rights to property protection and the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.

According to the petitioners’ lawyer, residents of Babri Banda had already been facing serious health problems even before the coal project, including heart disease, respiratory infections, skin ailments and cancer-related cases. He maintained that emissions from cement and coal plants were dangerous and could have lasting effects on both people and the wider environment.

Durrani also argued that the respondents were required under the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997, the KP Environmental Protection Act, 2014, and international conventions ratified by Pakistan to follow sustainable development principles and shield citizens from environmental risks.

EPA says plant lacks post-operational approval

Deputy Director Mumtaz Ali informed the court that an EPA team had visited the company’s premises in January 2026 and found that the coal power plant was still under construction and not operational. He said approval for the Initial Environmental Examination had already been granted for establishment of the project, but the plant could not begin operations without post-operational approval from the agency.

He told the bench that the company had not yet applied for post-operational approval and that, therefore, the plant was not operational. Counsel for the company, Abidullah, was unable to confirm whether the plant had begun operating.

The bench noted that no post-operational approval had been granted and observed that the company was therefore, prima facie, not legally authorised to operate the project at this stage. It also pointed out that the EPA had carried out no inspection since January 2026 to verify compliance with environmental standards, and recorded the deputy director’s proposal that the agency was ready to conduct a fresh inspection in the presence of a representative of the petitioners. Advocate Durrani did not object to that proposal.