IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                      W.P. (C) No. 3238 of 2018


                   Electrosteel Steels Limited           ...      ...  Petitioner
                                  Versus
                   The Secretary, Office of Lokayukta Jharkhand, Ranchi and
                   Anr.                             ...       ...     Respondents
                                                With
                                      W.P. (C) No. 4430 of 2017
                   Electrosteel Steels Limited           ...      ...  Petitioner
                                  Versus
                   Union of India and Others        ...    ...        Respondents
                                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Bhibhash Sinha, Advocate For the Resp. No. 1 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, Advocate

---

21/28.11.2019

1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner along with Mr. Bhibhash Sinha, Advocate.

2. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1.

3. Heard Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 2.

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that by way of supplementary-affidavit in W.P. (C) No. 3238/2018, the petitioner has raised a jurisdictional issue that the Officers who were involved in the present case from the Pollution Control Board as well as State Pollution Control Board are not covered under the jurisdiction of the learned Lokayukta in view of the provisions of Jharkhand Lokayukta Act, 2001. He submits that accordingly the entire proceeding before the learned Lokayukta was wholly without jurisdiction. He has also submitted that the State Pollution Control Board is constituted under the 2 provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as well as the provisions of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the same being central acts, the learned Lokayukta has no jurisdiction in connection with the Pollution Control Board.

5. The respondents are granted three weeks' time to respond to this supplementary-affidavit.

6. Counsel for the respondents also submit that considering the point of jurisdiction raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary as well as the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board through its Member Secretary may be made parties in this case because this issue will have wide ranging impact.

7. Considering the submissions made, the petitioner is directed to implead the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary as well as the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board through its Member Secretary as Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 respectively, in W.P. (C) No. 3238/2018. The petitioner is also directed to serve two copies of the entire records of W.P. (C) No. 3238 of 2o18 on the Office of the learned Advocate General, Jharkhand as well as retained counsel of the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board within a period of one week from today along with a copy of this order.

8. The State of Jharkhand as well as the Jharkhand Pollution Control Board are directed to file their necessary affidavits only to the aforesaid point of jurisdiction of learned Lokayukta.

9. Post these case on 19.12.2019.

10. Interim order granted earlier dated 26.07.2019 is directed to continue till the next date i.e. 19.12.2019.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Mukul