Telangana High Court
WP/22176/2006 of M/s. Sri Jagannath Steel Re-Rolling Mills, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 28 December 2006
THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.22176 of 2006 Between M/s Sri Jagannath Steel Re-Rolling Mills represented by its Proprietor .. petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest,
HON’BLE SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICEANDHON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Writ Petition No.22176 of 2006
BetweenM/s Sri Jagannath Steel Re-Rolling Mills represented by .. petitionerits Proprietor
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal..RespondentsSecretary, Environment, Forest, Science and TechnologyDepartment and others
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
:: JUDGMENT ::
Counsel for the petitioner
Sri K.Venumadhav
Counsel for respondent No.1Counsel for respondent Nos.2 andSri S.V.Bhatt3Counsel for respondent No.4Sri M.Sriramulu Reddy`
Government Pleader for Industries
28.12.2006
Per Sri G.S.Singhvi, CJ.
In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing closureorder dated 17.7.2006 passed by the Andhra Pradesh PollutionControl Board (for short ‘the Board’) under Section 31(A) of the Air(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1987 andSection 33 (A) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)Amendment Act, 1988.
It is borne out from the record that the petitioner has challengedthe closure order by filing an appeal, which stands registered asAppeal No.75 of 2006. The reason why the petitioner chose to invokethe jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia instead of pursuing the remedy of appeal is that the AppellateAuthority is not functioning since 01.10.2006.
On the last date of hearing i.e. 18.12.2006, the case wasadjourned to enable the learned Government Pleader to find out as towithin what time, the Government will take a decision in the matter ofthe Appellate Authority.
Today, the learned Government Pleader for Forests,Environment, Science and Technology stated that the AppellateAuthority was re-constituted vide G.O.Ms.No.146, Environment,Forests, Science and Technology Department dated 16.11.2006 andthe same is likely to become functional by 29.12.2006 because theGovernment has issued G.O.Ms.No.162 dated 27.12.2006 fixing itstenure as two years.
In view of the statement made by the learned GovernmentPleader, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous with thedirection that the Appellate Authority shall hear and decide the appealat the earliest.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.28164of 2006 is also disposed of as infructuous.
28-12-2006psr
G.S.SINGHVI, CJ
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J