Sr.No.24 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No.128/2026 Res Date of order:- 30.01.2026 Uploaded on:- 31.01.2026 M/S Radhey Stone Crusher, Village Jagti (Jadi) Kandoli, Nagrota, Tehsil & District Jammu Through its proprietor Mr. Bhupinder Singh, Age 50 years S/O Late Shri Shiv Dev Singh Jamwal, R/O H. No.358, Old Rehari, Jammu. ….Petitioners Through :- Mr. Sunil Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Navyug Sethi, Advocate. Versus 1. Jammu & Kashmir Pollution Control Committee, Parivesh Bhawan, Forest Complex, Transport Nagar, Jammu. 2. Regional Director, Jammu & Kashmir Pollution Control Committee, Parivesh Bhawan, Forest Complex, Transport Nagar, Jammu 3. Divisional Officer, Jammu & Kashmir Pollution Control Committee, Parivesh Bhawan, Forest Complex, Transport Nagar, Jammu ….Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Vivek Mattoo, AC Vice Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy. AG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER 30.01.2026 1. Petitioner, through the medium of this petition, has sought the following reliefs: “(a) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing legal notice No.PCC/RD-J/N- 2 WP(C) No.128/2026 I/Consent-O/25/2041-43 dated 15.12.2025 and legal notice No.PCC/RD-J/N-II/Consent-O/2440-42 dated 15.01.2026 issued by respondent no.2 threatening closure of petitioner- stone crusher on the ground that operation of stone crusher without consent from the respondent No.1-Committee, being totally illegal, arbitrary and in utter and flagrant violation of provisions of Section 10 of the Jammu and Kashmir Stone Crushers/Hot and Wet Mixing Plants Regulation Rules, 2021. (b) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to operate his stone crusher without any hindrance, obstruction or interruption on the basis of Consent to operate already granted in favour of the petitioner stone crusher by the respondents vide Consent Order dated 01.05.2023 and in furtherance of provisions of Section 10 of the Jammu and Kashmir Stone Crushers/Hot and Wet Mixing Plants Regulation Rules, 2021; and (c) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, while reiterating the submissions made in the petition, submits that the respondent- Jammu & Kashmir Pollution Control Committee (‘J&KPCC’ for short) has been interfering in the operation of its Stone Crusher on the plea of ‘without valid consent’ from J&KPCC. He submits that the petitioner was issued a Notice dated 15.12.2025, to which he had shown cause, however, the respondent-J&KPCC without consideration of his cause shown in the reply had termed the same as unsatisfactory, and that the Stone Crusher was being 3 WP(C) No.128/2026 illegally operating without valid consent from the J&K PCC, issued another Notice dated 15.01.2026 again asking the petitioner to show cause within seven days as to why legal action including closure of Stone Crusher should not be taken against it, for the violation under various environmental laws. 3. Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the petitioner had been granted Consent Order on 01.02.2023 by the J&K PCC and that in terms of provisions of S.O. 60 dated 23.02.2021, the Unit is not under an obligation to obtain such consent, as the Unit was operating before issuance of the S.O. 4. On perusal of the contents of the impugned Notices, the respondents are yet to pass any order adverse to the interests of the petitioner including the closure as stated in both the notices. The respondent-J&K PCC is expected to consider the reply/cause shown, so as to pass the final order which can be challenged before the Court in case of being aggrieved. 5. Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this petition be disposed of at this stage with the direction to the respondents to consider the cause shown by the petitioner in its reply before passing any order and also give a personal audience to its proprietor for being heard. 6. Mr. Vivek Mattoo, learned counsel appearing vice Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy. AG for the respondents, appearing on behalf of respondents submits that the respondents are not averse to the plea raised by the petitioners for disposal of the present petition at the motion stage, for consideration by the respondents. 4 WP(C) No.128/2026 7. In view of the pleadings, facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on behalf of the parties, the petition is disposed of, at this motion stage, with a direction to the respondent-J&K PCC to consider the reply to the show-cause notices and also provide an audience to the proprietor of the petitioner-firm before passing the order by the competent authority. 8. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. Jammu: 30.01.2026 Raj Kumar ( ) (M.A. Chowdhary) Judge Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No Raj Kumar 2026.01.31 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document