M/S ASHOK STONE CRUSHER THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR ASHOK MEHTA v. UT OF J AND KTHROUGH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY J AND K FOREST ECOLOGY AND ENVIORMENT DEPTT AND OTHERS
WP(C)/3285/2025 · 2026-06-05
Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1424 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1424 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 1623/2026, CM No. 3629/2026 c/w WP(C) No. 3285/2025, CM No. 7491/2025
M/S Ashok Stone Crusher through its Proprietor Sh. Ashok Mehta S/O Sh. Jagdish Chander Mehta R/O House No.46, Ward No.2, Adarsh Colony, Pathankot .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Parag Sharma, Advocate.
v/s
1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary, J&K Forest, Ecology & Environment, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu.
2. Member Secretary, J&K Pollution Control Committee, J&K, Jammu.
3. Divisional Office Pollution Control Committee (PCB), Kathua.
4. Executive Engineer, Electric Division, Kathua
5. Deputy Commissioner, Kathua
6. District Mineral Officer, Kathua .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy. AG.
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER 05.06.2026
1. In this petition, petitioner herein has challenged order dated 15.04.2026 issued by respondent No.2, whereby, directing Deputy Commissioner, PHE, JKDCL and Director Industries to close, deregister and disconnect power and water supply to the petitioner’s unit.
2. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned
order has been passed without affording any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. He further states that the Unit was established by way of a Sr. No. 122
2
Partnership Deed between the petitioner and one Mr. Ajeet Kumar Sharma, whereas the impugned closure order has been issued in the name of Sh. Sudhir Singh, who has no interest or legal association with the firm of the petitioners. As such, there is total non application of mind on the part of respondent No.2.
3. Leaned counsel for the petitioner states that Rules 33A, 34 & 35 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 have not been followed by the respondents.
4. Mr. Vishal Bharti, learned Dy. AG was directed to seek instructions. Today, when the matter is taken up, he has produced a copy of Show-Cause Notice dated 12.01.2026 issued by Regional Director PCC, Jammu to the petitioner asking him to respond to the notice within 7 days for the violation of various environmental laws, as also copy of Corrigendum dated 21.04.2026, wherein it is provided that name of proprietor Sh. Ashok Mehta be read as instead of Shri Sudhir Singh in closure order dated 15.04.2026 .
5. The above documents are taken on record.
6.
Learned counsel for the respondents has furnished copies of these documents to learned counsel for the petitioner in the open court.
7. Confronted with the above position, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the petitions with liberty to file fresh ones.
8. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge
JAMMU 05.06.2026 Raj Kumar Raj Kumar 2026.06.05 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document