Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S BANSAL BRICK WORKS versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. ENVIRONMENT & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/S Bansal Brick Works v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Environment & Others - WRIT - C No. 27899 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 1100 (20 April 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.3

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.27899/2005

M/S Bansal Brick Works Vs. State of U.P. and others

Hon. Sunil Ambwani, J.

Hon. Sanjay Misra, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri S.K.Mishra appears on behalf of respondent no.2. Sri Rajesh Tripathi appears on behalf of respondent no.5. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the rest respondents.

By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to quash the order dated 3.11.2004 issued by Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution  Control Board, Agra ( Annexure- 3 to the writ petition) and to issue a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful working of the petitioner's brick kiln.

The notice dated 3.11.2004 required the petitioner to make the compliance of norms of the Pollution Control Board and to use 25% fly ash in manufacturing of brick kiln in  accordance with the notification dated 14.6.1999.

In para 18 of the writ petition, the petitioner has made averments as follows:-

"The petitioner has approached  to the Regional Officer, Pollution Control Board on 9.3.2005 informing then that he has already applied for permission on 11.2.2005. After fulfilling the conditions required under the relevant act and provisions of Pollution Control Board and he is also using the fly ash to the extent of 25% as per the

-2-

government notification, then there is no justification for not granting the required permission."

The grievance of the petitioner is that he has already complied with the order of Pollution Control Board and  has deposited Rs.33000/- as prescribed fee. He has also stated that he is using 25% fly ash and for this purpose, he had made application to power house at Agra and as such the petitioner may be issued necessary certificate  for running brick kiln.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we find it appropriate to issue direction to Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution Control Board, Agra respondent no.2 to consider the application and  pass necessary orders in this regard in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within six weeks of  the date of communication of certified copy of this order.

In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of.

20.4.05

G/4


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.