Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010264402019




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                            Case No. : WA 6/2020

         1:M/S T. G. ENTERPRISE,
         REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR P. TOHEVI AWOMI, AIKO BUILDING 5TH FLOOR,
         OPPOSITE- TOWN HALL, BANK COLONY, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND.

         VERSUS

         1:NEW SOCUNOMA VILLAGE AND 6 ORS.
         REP. BY SHRI SALEW SEYIE, CHAIRMAN, NEW SOCUNOMA VILLAGE
         COUNCIL, P.O. MEDZIPHEMA, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND.

         2:THE STATE OF NAGALAND
          REP. THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND
          KOHIMA.

         3:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
          DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
          FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE
          NAGALAND
          KOHIMA.

         4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
          DIMAPUR
          NAGALAND.

         5:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
          MEDZIPHEMA
          DIMAPUR
          NAGALAND.

         6:THE NAGALAND POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
          REP. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY
          SIGNAL POINT
          DIMAPUR
          NAGALAND.
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/2


            7:SHRI MHIESISATO VUPRU
             NEW SOCUNOMA VILLAGE
             P.O. MEDZIPHEMA
             DIMAPUR NAGALAND


Counsel for appellant                :       Mr. A Dasgupta, Senior Advocate
Counsel for respondent No.1             :     Ms. M Dev

Counsel for respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 & 5: Ms. T Khro Counsel for respondent No.6 : Mr. T Islam BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJAI LAMBA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA 27.05.2020 (Ajai Lamba, C.J.) The Court proceedings have been conducted through Video-Conferencing in view of the present scenario so as to maintain social distancing.

2. It appears that the consent to operate stone crusher unit under the name and style of M/s T.G. Enterprise Stone Crusher Unit, New Socunoma village granted under Sections 25/26 of the Water (Prevention & control of Pollution) Act, 1974, as amended and under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 was in vogue till 2.8.2019. It has been contended on behalf of the respondents that the licence itself having expired, the issue raised by the petitioner is rendered academic. There is no cause of action as on date because in the absence of licence in any case the unit cannot be operated.

3. We hereby give time to learned counsel for the petitioner to take instructions in view of the changed circumstances.

4. List on 10.6.2020.

5. Let copy of this order be provided under the signature of the Court Master.

                            JUDGE                           CHIEF JUSTICE

Comparing Assistant