Who determines enforcement cost under both EPO & Absolute Order?

Under the PERA Force Laws, both Environmental Protection Orders (EPOs) and Absolute Orders may require enforcement actions such as sealing premises, confiscating goods, making arrests, or taking corrective measures. These actions incur costs, which must be calculated and assigned to the violator to maintain financial accountability.

The Hearing Officer (HO) is the legally designated authority responsible for determining the enforcement cost under both EPOs and Absolute Orders. This ensures that all costs are assessed objectively and fairly, based on the nature and extent of the enforcement action taken by the Enforcement Officer (EO). The cost determination may include:

• 
  

  Administrative expenses incurred during enforcement,

  
  


• 
  

  Costs of manpower and transportation,

  
  


• 
  

  Fees associated with sealing, confiscation, or removal of nuisances,

  
  


• 
  

  Any other operational expenses directly linked to executing the order.

  
  

Once the Hearing Officer determines the cost, it becomes a formal part of the enforcement directive. If the offender fails to pay, the cost can be recovered as arrears of land revenue, as provided under PERA laws. This process ensures transparency, prevents misuse of authority, and guarantees that enforcement operations are self-sustaining.

By centralizing the determination of enforcement costs with the Hearing Officer, the PERA framework maintains a balance between fairness to the offender and administrative efficiency. It prevents arbitrary cost imposition by field officers and ensures that all financial obligations are properly justified and documented.

In summary, under the PERA Force Laws, the Hearing Officer determines the enforcement cost for both EPOs and Absolute Orders, providing a fair, accountable, and legally enforceable basis for cost recovery.