M/S Runit Fabrics v. State Of Punjab & Others
CWP-1120-2017 & CWP-2311-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: August 28, 2018 1.
CWP-1120-2017 M/s Runit Fabrics
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
2.
CWP-2311-2017 M/s Runit Fabrics
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE.
Present:
Mr. Kewal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Avinit Avasthi, AAG, Punjab, for respondent No. 1.
Ms. Nikita Bansal, Advocate, for Mr. Nitin Kaushal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
Mr. Himanshu Puri, Advocate, for respondent No. 6.
KRISHNA MURARI, C.J. (ORAL) By means of these writ petitions, filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice and the orders passed under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short, 'the 1974 Act') and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (for short, 'the 1981 Act'). PRASHANT KAPOOR 2018.08.30 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
CWP-1120-2017 & CWP-2311-2017 In CWP No. 1120 of 2017, show cause notice, dated 25.11.2016 (Annexure P-9), issued under Section 25/26 of the 1974 Act and Section 21 of the 1981 Act, has been challenged, to which a reply was submitted, whereupon respondent No. 3 passed an order dated 02.01.2017 (Annexure P-11), issuing certain directions in exercise of powers under Section 33-A of the 1974 Act (as amended from time to time). In CWP No. 2311 of 2017, the petitioner has challenged orders dated 02.02.2017 (Annexures P-13 to P-16), passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4, whereby the consent to operate the industry, granted under the provisions of the 1974 & 1981 Acts, stand revoked.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset made a statement that the consent to operate the industry has since come to an end on 30.06.2018, and thereafter the industry is not being run by the petitioner. That being the position, the challenge to the show cause notice as also the orders dated 02.01.2017 and 02.02.2017, loses its significance and these petitions have been rendered infructuous. The same are accordingly dismissed.
(KRISHNA MURARI) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE August 28, 2018 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:
YES / NO Whether Reportable:
YES / NO PRASHANT KAPOOR 2018.08.30 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document