Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Shah Stone Crusher And Ors vs Union Territory Of J And K And Ors on 29 March, 2024
Author: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Bench: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
S. No.151
Regular list
HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 640/2024
CM 1752/2024
SHAH STONE CRUSHER AND ORS. ...Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Malik Aadil Mujtaba, Advocate
Vs.
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. ...Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Reekha Wangnoo, GA vice
Mr. Alla Ud Din Ganai, AAG
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
29.03.2024
01. The petitioners through the medium of the instant writ petition are aggrieved of the final notice issued by the respondent no. 3, whereby the petitioners have been directed to close down the respective units by virtue of notice bearing no. TK/OQ/2 023/737-58 dated 22nd March, 2024, issued against the petitioners, separately. The petitioners are also aggrieved of the subsequent order dated 26th March, 2024 issued by the respondent no. 3 just after 4 days, whereby, the respondent no. 4- Executive Engineer, Mechanical Engineering (MED) has been directed to depute three JCB's at the location so that the anti-encroachment drive is brought to its logical conclusion with respect to the stone crushers of the petitioners.
02. The specific case of the petitioners is that they are running the stone crusher units at village Lolpora, Kunzer, District Baramulla, Kashmir for more than 15 years and all the units of the petitioners have got registered from various department(s), after following the guidelines as required under law, besides seeking permission from the appropriate authorities to install the unit of their respective lines. The further case of the petitioners is that no objection certificates (NOC) were obtained by the petitioners for running the stone crusher units from various departments, the details of which finds mention in Para-6 of the writ petition. The petitioners have also placed on record NOC (s) issued by the respondent no. 3 in favour of the petitioners for running stone crusher units. Even the permanent registration certificate under Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME) has also been issued in favour of the petitioners by the Industries Department, pursuant to which the petitioners have also been granted consent to operate the stone crushers by the State Pollution Control Board by virtue of different consent orders issued in their favour on the strength of which the petitioners have been running their units strictly in conformity under section 25/26 of Water (Prevention of Control of Pollution Act 1974) and under section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution Act) 1981.
03. The petitioners through the medium of the instant petition are aggrieved of the notices dated 22nd March, 2024 and also the order passed by the respondent no. 3 dated 26th March, 2024 on the ground that the said authority i.e. the respondent no. 3 which has already granted NOC in favour of the petitioners and has allowed the petitioners to operate the stone crusher units has issued the impugned notice/order.
04. The case of the petitioners is that the impugned notices have been issued at the back of the petitioners without providing an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and also by the same authority who has granted NOC in favour of the petitioners and even no ample time has been given to the petitioners to respond to the aforesaid final notice and just after four days has issued yet another order dated 26th March, 2024, whereby a directions has been issued to the concerned Executive Engineer to carry out the so called anti-encroachment drive with regard to the stone crushers of the petitioners.
05. The specific case of the petitioners is that without providing ample opportunity the order passed by the Tehsildar has been directed to be carried out by concerned Executive Engineer and that too at the back of the petitioners, when the petitioners have fulfilled all the requisite formalities as envisaged under law and were running stone crusher unit for the last more than 15 years.
06. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a Coordinate Bench of this Court has already considered an identical matter being WP (C) 246/2021 and has granted status quo.
07. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the record.
08. Prima facie, a case for indulgence and interim relief is made out.
09. Issue notice, which is accepted by Ms. Reekha Wangnoo, Government Advocate appearing vice Mr. Alla Ud Din Ganai, learned Additional Advocate General. She seeks and is granted four weeks time to file response.
10. List on 6th May, 2024.
11. In the meantime, subject to objections and till next date of hearing before the Bench, impugned notice dated 22nd March, 2024 and order dated 26th March, 2024 issued by the respondent no. 3 shall remain stayed.
Alteration, vacation and modification on motion.
;
(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE SRINAGAR 29.03.2024 Mubashir