(103)
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH


                                        CWP No.24993 of 2016
                                        Date of decision : 30.05.2017

M/s Jayanti Timber
                                                                .....Appellant
                   Versus

State of Haryana and others
                                                              .....Respondents


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DARSHAN SINGH

Present:     Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate for petitioner.

             Mr. Randhir Singh, Additional Advocate General, Haryana
             for the respondents.
                   ***

S.S. SARON J.

Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. A.G. Haryana has placed on record an order dated 25.05.2017 passed by the Haryana State Pollution Control Board, Panchkula (respondent No.2) ('Board' - for short), whereby closure order issued against the unit M/s Jayanti Timber (petitioner) under Section 31-A of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ('Air Act' - for short) and Section 33-A of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 ('Water Act' - for short) has been suspended with the following conditions : -

1. The unit will run only after getting the valid CTO (consent to operate) permission from the Board.

2. Regional Officer will decide the pending CTO of unit within 15 days.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2017 15:07:48 ::: CWP No.24993 of 2016 -2-

3. The suspension of closure order issued prejudice the merit of CTO application and in case CTO application pending decided for refusal the closure order will be re- implemented.

Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. A.G. Haryana has also placed on record communication dated 29.05.2017 from respondent No.2 Board to M/s Jayanti Timber Industries (petitioner) regarding grant of consent to operate, whereby the consent to operate has been granted as per specification/terms and conditions as mentioned therein.

Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate for petitioner submits that the civil suit filed by the petitioner against the department would be withdrawn. He also states that further litigation with the department shall also be withdrawn. However, there is a criminal complaint which is pending against one of the officer. It is submitted that the same would also hopefully be resolved amicably.

In view of above, nothing survives in the present writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

                                                         ( S.S. SARON )
                                                             JUDGE


                                                       ( DARSHAN SINGH )
30.05.2017                                                  JUDGE
sunil yadav

       Whether speaking/reasoned      :     Yes / No

       Whether reportable             :     Yes / No




                                   2 of 2
              ::: Downloaded on - 09-06-2017 15:07:49 :::