Disposed

Apm Industries Ltd. v. Central Ground Water Authority

Rajasthan HC16 Mar 2026CW/4332/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition after registering the petitioner with liberty to submit written objections regarding a demand of Rs.43,53,350 without engaging with the legal merits of the matter or construing any statutes. No substantive decision was rendered.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to submit written objections regarding the impugned demand of Rs.43,53,350/-; respondents to decide within 21 days; stay on coercive actions.

Apm Industries Ltd. Vs Central Ground Water… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:11077]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4332/2026

¶4

Apm Industries Ltd., Through Authorised Signatory/ Managing Director, Sp-147, Riico Industrial Area, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan, India- 301019

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Central Ground Water Authority, Through Its Member Secretary, Ministry Of Jal Shakti, Csmrs Campus, O1Of Palme Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi- 110016, Also At Central Ground Water Authority, (Regional OfficeRajasthan), Central Ground Water Board, Western Region, 6-A, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur 302004, Rajasthan

¶8

Union Of India, Through Its Joint Secretary, Ministry Of Jal Shakti, Department Of Water Resources, River Development And Ganga Rejuvenation, Government Of India, Cr Section, Room No 224, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi- 110001

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mithun Bhai Chaturvedi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Alok Garg with Ms. Swati Daga Ms. Anima Chaturvedi for Mr. Bharat Vyas, ASG

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶12

Order

¶13

16/03/2026

¶14

After arguing the matter at some length, counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if the petitioner is allowed to raise objections by submitting a written representation to the respondents as regards the impugned demand of Rs.43,53,350/- and the respondents consider its objections and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order.

[2026:RJ-JP:11077]

[CW-4332/2026]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection in case the petitioner raises objection as regards the impugned demand and they will also consider and decide the objections if submitted by the petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order.

¶19

In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the facts of the case, this Court feels that ends of justice would meet if the petitioner is allowed to make objection/representation to the respondents as regards the impugned demand.

¶20

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to submit the objection/representation to the respondents as regards the impugned demand within a period of 7 days from today.

¶21

In case the respondents receive any objection/representation as regards the impugned demand within the given time, they shall consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 21 days thereafter.

¶22

Till the respondents decide the objection/representation, if submitted by the petitioner, the respondents shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner.

¶23

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶24

Ashish Kumar /52

Apm Industries Ltd. v. Central Ground Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Apm Industries Ltd. v. Central Ground Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Lata Gupta W/O Mr. Gyan Prakash Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

B.S. Public School Nauganwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Dcs College of Medical Science Vs the State of Rajasthan

Aarogya Collage of Nursing Vs the State of Rajasthan

Hemant Kumar Kasliwal S/O Shri Hukam Chand Kasliwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Nitesh Tongaria S/O Shri Kesar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan