Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 22]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vipin Kumar Chugh vs Rajsthan State Pollution Control Board on 3 August, 2022

Author: Vijay Bishnoi

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6847/2022

Vipin Kumar Chugh, Aged About 45 Years, Huf Through Its Karta
Vipin Kumar S/o Sh. Ratanlal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 68/2
Gb, Anupgarh District, Sriganganagar
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     Rajsthan     State      Pollution        Control         Board,    Through
       Secretary, Headquarter, 4, Institutional Area, Jhalana
       Doongri, Jaipur.
2.     Environmental Engineer (Environment Compensation),
       Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Jaipur
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :    Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari
For Respondent(s)         :



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order 03/08/2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner-company has submitted that the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board vide order dated 08.03.2022 (Annexure-8) has imposed an environmental compensation to the tune of Rs.24,85,000/- without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-company. It is also submitted that the order dated 08.03.2022 is not a speaking order. Learned counsel for the petitioner-company while placing reliance on an order passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Appeal No.22/2022 has submitted that the National Green Tribunal has set aside the demand raised by the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board in the matter some of the brick kilen owners and the case of the petitioner-company is (Downloaded on 03/08/2022 at 09:25:09 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-6847/2022] similar to that matter. It is further submitted that the National Green Tribunal has observed that as the due process of law has not been followed in passing the impugned order, the impugned order be treated as notice and the State Pollution Control Board shall pass a fresh order considering the stand of the appellant of that case, including any further updated reply.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-company has submitted that in view of the above, this writ petition may also be disposed of with a direction to the State Pollution Control Board to pass a fresh order after considering the stand/reply of the petitioner- company.

In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is disposed of. The order dated 08.03.2022 shall be treated as notice to the petitioner-company. The petitioner-company may file its reply to the said notice and the State Pollution Control Board shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law and, thereafter, pass a fresh order within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Stay petition is also disposed of.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 28-AjaySingh/-

(Downloaded on 03/08/2022 at 09:25:09 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)