Dismissed

M S Arya Erectors India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority Seiaa and Ors.

Gauhati HC10 Feb 2026WP(C)/715/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A construction company challenged SEIAA's communication requiring compliance with recommendations arising from NGT directions on environmental violations, pleading difficulty in complying. The High Court held the matter emanated from NGT proceedings and a review application was pending there; it declined to entertain the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

None granted; writ petition dismissed without prejudice to remedies before the National Green Tribunal.

M S Arya Erectors India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State… — Environment and Pollution | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010287512025

2026:GAU-AS:1932

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/715/2026

¶6

M S ARYA ERECTORS INDIA PVT LTD

¶7

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HOUSE NO. 123, ARYA SMART LIVING ABHAYPUR, NORTH GUWAHATI, DIST-KAMRUP, ASSAM PIN 781031... REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR ANIL KUMAR SARMA

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY SEIAA AND ORS ASSAM, BAMUNIMAIDAN, GUWAHATI, DIST-KAMRUPM, ASSAM, PIN 781021. REPRESENTED MEMBER SECRETARY

¶10

2:THE GUWAHATI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATEFED BUILDING BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI DIST-KAMRUPM ASSAM PIN 781005.. ...REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CEO

¶11

3:NORTH GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL BOARD SILSAKOO NORTH GUWAHATI DIST-KAMRUP M ASSAM. PIN781030 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶12

4:RUDRESHWAR GAON PANCHAYAT RUDRESHWAR NORTH GUWAHATI DIST-KAMRUP M

¶13

Page No.# 2/6

¶14

ASSAM.PIN781030REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT

¶15

5:THE ASSAM REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY JAWAHAR NAGAR KHANAPARA N.H.37 BY PASS GUWAHATI-22 DIST-KAMRUPM ASSAM. PIN78102

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶17

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Dutta, Sr. Advocate Mr. A. Biswas, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Baruah, Advocate Mr. P. Nayak, Advocate Mr. J. Handique, Advocate

¶18

Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 11.02.2026

¶19

Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : NA

¶20

Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : Yes

¶21

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶22

Heard Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. S. Baruah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1; Mr. P. Nayak, the learned counsel

¶23

Page No.# 3/6

¶24

appears on behalf of the respondent No.2 and Mr. J. Handique, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.3.

¶25

Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, this Court dispenses with the notice upon the proforma respondent Nos.4 & 5.

¶26

The grievance of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner had submitted a representation on 27.03.2025, pursuant to the directions issued by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, (SEIAA) on 15.02.2025 to duly comply with the said recommendations and the said representation dated 27.03.2025 has not yet been considered. It is under such circumstances, the petitioner being in difficulty, has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶27

This Court duly takes note of that on the basis of certain complaints being filed by one Ganesh Das and others, a proceedings was initiated before the National Green Tribunal, Eastern Zone Bench, Kolkata, which was registered as Original Application No.92/2023/EZ whereby the SEIAA along with Assam State Public Pollution Control Board were directed to work out the costs incurred in expansion of the project and determine the environment compensation. Further, the SEIAA was also directed to carry out the remedial measures on damage assessment.

¶28

Page No.# 4/6

¶29

Directions were also issued directing the SEIAA to take action against the petitioner for violation of the EC condition by complying with the principles of natural justice.

¶30

In pursuance thereto, the SEIAA took up the matter and submitted a report on 29.01.2025 thereby giving certain recommendations. In pursuance thereto, on 15.02.2025, the Member Secretary of SEIAA informed the petitioner that the SEIAA unanimously decided to send a copy of the report to the project proponent and the petitioner was further directed to comply with the observations and recommendations of the Committee as suggested in the said report.

¶31

The petitioner thereupon submitted an application before the Chairman, SEIAA on 27.03.2025 stating the difficulties faced by the petitioner to comply with the directions issued by the order dated 15.02.2025 which the petitioner received on 04.03.2025. The said application of the petitioner, however, has not been considered, and under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking interference with the communication dated 15.02.2025 and other consequential directions.

¶32

This Court has heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and is of the opinion that the matter in

¶33

Page No.# 5/6

¶34

question emanates from certain directions passed by the National Green Tribunal from the order dated 12.09.2024 in Original Application No.92/2023/EZ. It is further seen that on the basis of such directions, the SEIAA has made certain recommendations. The communication dated 23.07.2025 issued to the Chairman, SEIAA also shows that the petitioner is though interested in complying with the directions passed in the order dated 15.02.2025, but the petitioner in view of certain difficulties stated therein, the petitioner is not in a position to comply. It is the opinion of this Court that these aspects ought to be agitated by the petitioner before the National Green Tribunal.

¶35

During the course of the hearing, Mr. S. Baruah the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent No.1 submitted that the petitioner has also filed a review application before the National Green Tribunal in respect of the said issue.

¶36

Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court that entertaining the instant writ petition would be in conflict with the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 and also would not be in the interest of justice taking into account that the National Green Tribunal, Eastern Zone, Kolkata is taking up the issues involved herein on a review application so filed by the petitioner.

¶37

Accordingly, this Court therefore is not inclined to entertain

¶38

Page No.# 6/6

¶39

the instant writ petition for which the writ petition stands dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner to seek remedies before the National Green Tribunal, if so advised.

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

Digitally signed by Pradip Kumar Kalita Pradip Kumar Kalita Date: 2026.02.12 18:46:23 +05'30'

¶42

Comparing Assistant

M S Arya Erectors India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority Seiaa and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M S Arya Erectors India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority Seiaa and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rana Deb Saikia Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Soilo Bala Barman and Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Sibesh Barman and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sk Abdulla and 45 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rajendra Ram and 61 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Simanta Das Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.