Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Pom Hydro Energy Ltd And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Others on 4 June, 2021
Bench: Arun Palli, Meenakshi I. Mehta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 10758 of 2021
Date of Decision: 04.6.2021
M/S POM Hydro Energy Ltd. & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ...... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present : Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Himanshu Arora, Advocate,
Ms. Bina Gupta, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional A.G., Haryana.
None for the caveator.
(The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing
since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual Court).
ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral):
The petitioners have assailed the notification dated 5.5.2021 (Annexure P-1), issued under Rule 77 of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act, 1974, that postulates that canal for execution of work of re-modelling of augmentation canal from Hamida head to Picholia head will remain closed from 5.5.2021 to 30.6.2021, for repairs and other emergent works.
The petitioners are running two micro hydro projects at Khukhni and Mussapur and are using the canal water for generation of power. The limited grievance that they have is that owing to closure of the canal, their operations and business activities shall be severely impacted.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2021 23:32:36 ::: CWP No. 10758 of 2021 -2- Mr. Ankur Mittal, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, submits that the matter is already being examined and he has been instructed to submit that in case the petitioners move the authorities qua their concerns and grievances, as set out in the petition, the same shall be considered and dealt with by the Additional Chief Secretary (Irrigation and W.S.), and appropriate orders, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, shall be passed.
To this, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that let this petition be disposed of, in terms of the statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General, but the authorities be required to pass necessary orders within a specified time.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of the statement of the learned State counsel, to enable the respondent authorities to examine and deal with the matter in the right earnest, and take an appropriate decision, preferably within 4 weeks from today. However, if any cause of action still survives, the petitioners shall be at liberty to avail the remedies, as shall be admissible in law.
Needless to assert that this order shall not constitute any expression of opinion on the merits of the case of either party.
(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 04.6.2021 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No AK Sharma Whether reportable Yes/No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2021 23:32:36 :::