← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2679/2019disposed off

M/S Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt Ltd v. Central Ground Water Authority (Cgwa)

2019-08-02Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2679 of 2019

1. M/s Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt Ltd Through Its Director Sanjeev Kumar Upadhyay, S/o Om Prakash Upadhyay, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Flat No. 305, Laxmi Height, Near Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

2. Sanjeev Kumar Upadhyay S/o Om Prakash Upadhyay Aged About 45 Years R/o Flat No. 305, Laxmi Height, Near Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA) Through Member Secretary, Ministry Of Water Resources, 18/11, Jamnagar House, Mansingh Road, New Delhi 110011.

2. Regional Director, Central Ground Water Board, North Board Central Chhattisgarh, 2nd Floor, LK Corporate And Logistic Park, Dhamtari Road NH - 30, Dumartarai, Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For petitioners - Shri Manay Nath Thakur, Advocate. For respondents-Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Asst.S.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 02/08/2019 Heard.

1.

Limited prayer in this petition is that the petitioner has made an application before the respondent No.2 on 30/08/2018 for grant of no objection certificate for use of ground water for the industrial purpose, however the same is not being decided, therefore the respondent may be directed to decide the application to grant permission to the petitioner. 2.

Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the application of the petitioner have been forwarded by the respondent No.2 Regional Director, Central Ground Water Board which is placed at Chhattisgarh to the respondent No.1 Central Ground Water Authority and respondent No.1 has to decide the same.

3.

Considering such facts of the case, since respondent No.2 has

already forwarded the application of the petitioner for adjudication to respondent No.1, it is directed that the respondent No.1 shall decide the same within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. It is further made clear that this court has not made any observation on the merits of this case.

4.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri