Disposed

M/S. Prisha Stone , through Its Authorised Signatory Viral Vishnu Thakkar v. the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Nov 2017WP/12192/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Multiple writ petitions filed by stone crushers challenging MP Vishakha. The court accepted the respondent's statement regarding pending appeals and directed their disposal within four weeks. It restrained authorities from disconnecting power supply for four weeks thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Restraint on concerned authorities from disconnecting power supply till disposal of appeal and for four weeks thereafter.

M/S. Prisha Stone , through Its Authorised Signatory… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2017)

wp-11538-2017.doc

Varsha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 12185 of 2017

¶6

M/s. Mauli Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors… Respondents

¶9

WITH

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 12095 of 2017

¶11

M/s. Shree Balaji Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶14

WITH

¶15

WRIT PETITION NO. 12192 of 2017

¶16

M/s. Prisha Stone … Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors… Respondents

¶19

WITH

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO. 12092 of 2017

¶21

M/s. Yashraj Stone Metal … Petitioner

¶22

Versus

¶23

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors… Respondents

1 of 4

wp-11538-2017.doc

Varsha

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 11538 of 2017

¶30

M/s. Shri Vigsons Aggregates … Petitioner

¶31

Versus

¶32

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶33

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11537 of 2017

¶34

M/s. Shree Devram Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶35

Versus

¶36

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶37

WITH

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO. 11539 of 2017

¶39

M/s. Motilal Dhoot Sand & Stone Pvt. Ltd., … Petitioner

¶40

Versus

¶41

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶42

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11880 of 2017

¶43

M/s. Shri Sai Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶44

Versus

¶45

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

2 of 4

wp-11538-2017.doc

Varsha

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12109 of 2017

¶51

M/s. Ghule & Bapkar Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶52

Versus

¶53

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶54

WITH

¶55

WRIT PETITION NO. 12184 of 2017

¶56

M/s. Shree Gurudatta Stone Crusher … Petitioner

¶57

Versus

¶58

The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board & Ors.… Respondents

¶59

Dr. Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Deshmukh i/b Ms. Kanchan S. Chindarkar for petitioners in all petitions.

¶60

Ms. Rekha Panchal for respondent nos. 1 and 2 in all petitions. Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP for respondent nos. 3 to 10.

¶61

Mr. Vikas Mali, AGP for State in WP No. 12095 of 2017 and WP Nos. 12192 of 2017.

¶62

CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. & M.S. SONAK, J.

¶63

DATE : 15TH NOVEMBER, 2017.

¶64

P.C. :

¶65

. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶66

Learned counsel for the parties state that all these petitions

¶67

can be disposed of by a common order.

¶68

3 of 4

¶69

Varsha 4 wp-11538-2017.doc

¶70

Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2, on the basis of instructions, makes a statement that the petitioners' appeals pending before respondent no.3 will be disposed of on merits within a period of four weeks from today.

¶71

We accept this statement and direct the appellate authority to dispose of all the appeals within a period of four weeks from today.

¶72

Mr. Sathe, learned senior counsel for the petitioners makes a statement that the petitioners have already closed down their units. He submits that there is some plantation at the site and in the event of disconnection of electricity supply, the same will cause prejudice.

¶73

In these circumstances, we restrain the concerned authorities from disconnecting the power supply till the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority and for a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶74

With the aforesaid directions, alternate prayer clause (b) stands substantially worked out.

¶75

The petitions are, accordingly, disposed of on the aforesaid terms.

¶76

All concerned to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

¶77

(M.S. SONAK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶78

4 of 4

M/S. Prisha Stone , through Its Authorised Signatory Viral Vishnu Thakkar v. the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Prisha Stone , through Its Authorised Signatory Viral Vishnu Thakkar v. the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

New Pushtikar Chsl and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.

Sapan Shrivastava and Anr. Vs General Manager Central Railway and 3 Ors.

The Security Association of India Vs Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ors.

Nav Mahrashtra Magasvargiya Kamgar Yantramag Audyogik Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, through Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nav Mahrashtra Magasvargiya Kamgar Yantramag Audyogik Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, through Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Tirupati Magasvargiya Industrial Cooperative Societies Ltd., Shivnakwadi Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.