TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPERS, INC vs COURT OF APPEALS FACTS: Technology Developers is a domestic private corporation engaged in the manufacture and

export of charcoal briquette. The residents of Barangay Guyong, Sta. Maria, Bulacan, complained about the hazardous effect of the plant to their health. In response to the grievances of the resident, the acting mayor, in a letter of February 16, 1989, called the attention of Technology Developers to the pollution emitted by the fumes of its plant whose offensive odor not only pollute the air in the locality but also affect the health of the residents in the area, so that petitioner was ordered to stop its operation until further orders and it was required to bring the following: a) Building permit; b) Mayor's permit; c) Region III-Pollution of Environment and Natural Resources Anti-Pollution Permit; and of other document. Technology Developers commenced to secure their anti-pollution permit and other documents. Having noticed that they dont have the mayors permit, the representative of the Technology Developers tried to secure a mayors permit but never been entertained by the mayors office. On April 6, 1989, without previous and reasonable notice upon petitioner, respondent acting mayor ordered the Municipality's station commander to padlock the premises of petitioner's plant, thus effectively causing the stoppage of its operation. ISSUE: Whether or not the Technology Developers could validly operate their plant despite the absence of the mayors permit and other necessary documents. RULLING: While it is true that the matter of determining whether there is a pollution of the environment that requires control if not prohibition of the operation of a business is essentially addressed to the then National Pollution Control Commission of the Ministry of Human Settlements, now the Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, it must be recognized that the mayor of a town has as much

responsibility to protect its inhabitants from pollution, and by virtue of his police power, he may deny the application for a permit to operate a business or otherwise close the same unless appropriate measures are taken to control and/or avoid injury to the health of the residents of the community from the emissions in the operation of the business. Also the Technology Developers had failed to secure a building permit and failed to install a proper air pollution device. All of these merit the decision of the lower court to stop said corporation from operating. There might be the need to promote investment and contribute to the growth of the economy, it is, however, equally essential to protect the health, nay the very lives of the people, from the deleterious effect of the pollution of the environment.