Uttarakhand High Court
WPPIL/54/2014 on 5 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
AND
SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.
05th MARCH, 2022
WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 54 OF 2014
Between:
Sunil Mehra.
...Petitioner
and
State of Uttarakhand and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner. : None for the petitioner.
Counsel for the State of : Mr. A.S. Rawat, the learned Special
Uttarakhand. Counsel assisted by Mr. Pradeep Joshi,
the learned Additional Chief Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
Counsel for the respondent nos. : Mr. Piyush Garg, the learned counsel.
14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 36, 37, 39
and 42.
Counsel for the respondent nos. : Mr. B.D. Pande and Mr. Harshit
17, 19 and 31. Sanwal, the learned counsel.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made
the following
JUDGMENT : (per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed
for the following reliefs :-
"i) To issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of certiorari for quashing the
permission no. 2764/ VII-1/ 227-Kha/ 2013 dated
31.1.2014 for establishing the Stone Crasher to
the respondent no.6 at village Sakhanpur, Tehsil
Ramnagar, Distt: Nainital in Khasra no. 54/2,
54/3, 54/1 & 63/1 total area 4.307 hectare and
out of which 5 acres of the land is to be used for
establishing the Stone Crasher (annexure no.1).
ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in
the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondent no. 6 not to install the stone crasher
on the proposed site of village Sakhanpur Tehsil
Ramnagar Distt: Nainital on the basis of the
permission dated 31.1.2014 (annexure no.1).
iii) To issue any other writ, order or
direction or grant such other further relief in favor
of the petitioner which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
iv) Award the cost of the petition to the
petitioner."
2. It is apparent from the records that the
petitioner has directly approached this Court without
ventilating his grievances before the authorities. In the
meantime, the policy has also been changed, which
gives a further cause of action to the petitioner.
3. In that view of the matter, if the petitioner still
has any grievance, he may file a properly articulated
representation ventilating his grievances before the
respondent no. 1 i.e. the Principal Secretary, Industry,
within 30 days by annexing a copy of this order as well
as a copy of the Writ Petition.
4. In such an event, the Principal Secretary,
Industry-respondent no. 1 shall hear the concerned
parties and, after affording a reasonable opportunity of
hearing and production of documents to the parties,
shall take a decision within 45 days from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order, along with a
copy of the Writ Petition.
5. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ
Petition is disposed of.
6. In sequel thereto, all pending applications also
stand disposed of.
________________
S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
____________
R.C. KHULBE, J.
Dt: 05th March, 2022
Rahul
