M/s Sidh Baba Eint Udyog, through Proprietor Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and Others
WRIC/188/2025 · 2025-01-10
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 116030 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 116030 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2039-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 188 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Sidh Baba Eint Udyog, Through Proprietor Sunil Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. Environment, Forest And Climate Change, And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saryu Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Asit Srivastava Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. Heard Shri Saryu Prasad Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vaibhav Mishra, who has put in appearance on behalf of U.P. Pollution Control Board. The petitioner by complying with the requisite conditions was issued a Consent To Operate (CTO) the brick-kiln and authorization so granted was operative upto 31.12.2014. It appears that the renewal of CTO was not obtained by the petitioner as a consequence whereof, a closure order dated 16.10.2018 came to be passed against him which has remained unquestioned. The petitioner having regard to the aforesaid facts applied for grant of CTO afresh. The U.P. Pollution Control Board has rejected the petitioner's application merely on the ground that a closure order was passed against the brick kiln run by the petitioner on 16.10.2018, therefore, the application made by him for the grant of fresh CTO cannot be issued. We have gone through the closure order passed against the petitioner on 16.10.2018 and it appears that the same was passed merely on the ground of failure on the part of the petitioner to get the CTO renewed beyond the period for which
it was initially granted i.e. upto 31.12.2024. Closure order of this description cannot be an impediment coming in the way of
consideration of the petitioner's request for issuance of a fresh CTO. Thus, in the circumstances of the case, we hereby direct the opposite parties to consider the petitioner's application for grant of CTO afresh, in accordance with law, and take a final decision expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a fresh application. While considering the case of the petitioner, the report dated 29.02.2024, as stated by the learned counsel for the U.P. Pollution Control Board, may also be adverted by the competent authority. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of. . (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.)
Order Date :- 10.1.2025 akhilesh/- Digitally signed by :- AKHILESHWAR KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench