Madhya Pradesh High Court
Confederation Of Real Estate ... vs Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board on 26 February, 2026
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:22265
1 WP-6914-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 26 th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 6914 of 2026
CONFEDERATION OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATION OF
INDIA
Versus
MADHYA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ANOTHER
Appearance:
Shri Manoj Kumar Sharma - Senior Advocate with Shri Ankit Upadhyay -
Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Siddharth Seth - Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed assailing the orders dated 26/12/2025 and 14/02/2026, whereby notices have been issued to the members of the petitioner Association and they have been directed not to operate any industry or any institution without obtaining renewal of consent from the Board and have been threatened with initiation of proceedings under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1974 ') and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1981 ').
2 . It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is an Association continuously espousing the grievance of Real Estate Developers working in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh. The present petition has been preferred by an authorized person of the Association. The members of the petitioner Association are engaged in the activity of colony development and construction of buildings Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-03-2026 10:32:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:22265 2 WP-6914-2026 and other incidental works related thereto and are registered under the Madhya Pradesh (Colonizers, Development, Conditions and Limitations) Rules, 1998. Upon completion of the development and construction activities and after full satisfaction of all development works by the third party, the premises were taken over by the Municipal Corporation Bhopal as per the settled and long-standing practice. To the utter shock of the members of the petitioner Association, they have received notices dated 26/12/2025 and 14/02/2026 directing them not to operate any industry/ institution without obtaining renewal of consent from the Board. It also directed for submission of applications for renewal of consent and cautioned that failure to do so would result in initiation of Court proceedings against the operators of industry/ institution under Section 44 of the Act of 1974 and under Section 21 of the Act of 1981 for violating provision of Section 25 of the Act of 1974 and Sections 37 and 39 of the Act of 1981. It is their case that the petitioner Association has already completed the projects and is not related in any manner in ongoing activities. They are being asked to renew their air and water consents after years of completion and eventual handover of the projects which were taken over by its Resident Welfare Association.
3. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the impugned notice which has been issued as well as document dated 14/02/2026 and has argued that the entire exercise has been carried out by the Authorities in pursuance to suo moto Writ Petition No.48095/2025 and the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court at Indore Bench. It is their case that the petitioner is nowhere connected with the issue as the properties and the projects which are taken up by the petitioner has already been completed and the possession of which has already been handed over by the members of the petitioner Association. Therefore, they are not related and they are being harassed Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-03-2026 10:32:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:22265 3 WP-6914-2026 by issuance of such notices to them. They have prayed for quashment of such notices issued to them in the Writ Petition.
4 . Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has supported the impugned notice and contended that there were several flaws which were observed by the Court in suo moto Writ Petition. Therefore, direction was issued to the Chief Secretary to look into it. Based upon such directions, notices have been issued to the petitioner. The petitioner can file reply to the show cause notice and apprise the Authorities regarding completion of the projects and handing over of the projects to the Municipal Corporation. It is contended that in the State of Madhya Pradesh, there is gross violation of the pollution laws. Air and water consents are not being taken by the developers from the Pollution Control Board and they are regularly developing the colonies. Therefore, under the garb of the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court, entire action is taken against all the persons who are dealing with the development activities. The case of the members of the petitioner Association can be scrutinized individually once they file response to the show cause notice. It is further submitted that the proposed action against the members of petitioner Association will be taken only after considering the reply and after providing ample opportunity of hearing to them. It is further argued that a Writ Petition against show cause notice itself is not maintainable in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana reported in (2006) 12 SCC 28. Therefore, he has prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6 . The record indicates that the challenge in this petition is made to the notice issued to the members of the Association asking to demonstrate the consent being taken by them and the renewals from the Pollution Control Board regarding Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-03-2026 10:32:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:22265 4 WP-6914-2026 air and water in terms of the Act of 1974 and the Act of 1981. The show cause notices have been issued in pursuance to the suo moto Writ Petition registered by the Division Bench of this Court at Indore being W.P. No.48095 of 2025. This petition is filed on behalf of the Association challenging the show cause notices issued by the Authorities.
7. However, the fact remains that the Division Bench of this Court at Indore is seized with the matter and suo moto cognizance is taken and Writ Petition is registered on the ground that there is gross violation of relevant provisions of the Act i.e. Section 25 of the Act of 1974 and Sections 37 and 39 of the Act of 1981. The members of the petitioner Association are required to submit a reply to the show cause notice. They can apprise the respondents Authorities that they have completed the entire projects and handed over the possession to the respective Corporation or the residents and they have nothing to do with the renewal of their permission from the Pollution Control Board/ consent from the Pollution Control Board for carrying out the development activities.
8 . It is only a show cause notice and a Writ Petition against show cause notice is not maintainable in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunisetty Satyanarayana (supra) , wherein it has been held as under:-
"13. It is well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that ordinarily no writ lies against a charge sheet or show- cause notice vide Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board vs. Ramesh Kumar Singh and others JT 1995 (8) SC 331, Special Director and another vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and another AIR 2004 SC 1467, Ulagappa and others vs. Divisional Commissioner, Mysore and others 2001 (10) SCC 639, State of U.P. vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and another AIR 1987 SC 943 etc."
9. If the aforesaid principles are applied to the fact and circumstances of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-03-2026 10:32:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:22265 5 WP-6914-2026 case, it is clear that it is only a show cause notice which is issued to the members of the petitioner Association. The same does not call for any interference by this Court in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The members of the petitioner Association are having ample opportunity to file response to the show cause notice issued to them and apprise the Authorities regarding their stand.
10. Under these circumstances, no relief can be extended to the petitioner.
11. The petition sans merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE Shbhnkr Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-03-2026 10:32:07