Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 5 docs
Section 28 in The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Section 25 in The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Section 27 in The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Section 26 in The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981

advertisement
User Queries
advertisement

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Calcutta High Court
M/S Marshall Trexim (P) Ltd.& Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 June, 2008
Author: Mr. S. Nijjar
                                         1




                        WP No. 1394 of 2007

                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

                Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction

                             ORIGINAL SIDE



   M/S MARSHALL TREXIM (P) LTD.& ORS.                        Petitioners

       Versus

   THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.                           Respondents

For Petitioners : Mr. S. Pal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. A.N. Mukherjee, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Supriyo Bose, Advocate For Pollution Control Board : Mr. Kallol Bose, Advocate For Kolkata Municipal Corporation : Mr. Aloke Ghose and Mr. A. Banerjee, Advocates BEFORE:

The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR The Hon'ble JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE Date : 20th June, 2008.

The Court : It has been reiterated by Mr. Pal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, that the appeal was not maintainable before the Appellate Authority under Section 28 of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 as no cause of action had arisen to the complainant under Sections 25, 26 and 27 of the aforesaid Act. It has also been pointed out that the objection with regard to the maintainability of the appeal was specifically raised in the objections filed before the Appellate 2 Authority. In spite of the objections having been taken in writing and also oral submissions having been made to that effect, the Appellate Authority totally ignored the aforesaid objections and did not give any finding on the objections raised.

Prima facie it appears to us that the remedy of appeal under Section 28 of the said Act is limited only to Sections 25, 26 and 27 of the said Act. Since the order passed by the Appellate Authority is a quasi-judicial order, it is not required to be defended by the members of the Appellate Authority. We, however, direct Mr. Kallol Bose to appear for the Pollution Control Board to assist the Court with regard to the interpretation to be placed on Section 28 of the aforesaid Act.

Let the matter appear on Friday next (27.6.08). Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, CJ.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) SN.