HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 3129 of 2018
 

 
Petitioner :- M/S Ashutosh Brick Field Thru. Proprietor Ashutosh Trivedi
 
Respondent :- State Of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayat Raj And Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.K. Verma,Ajay Pandey,Sudhir Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri A.K.Verma, learned counsel for the respondent no.3, Sri Ajay Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 and 5 and Sri Manish Mishralearned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 and 2.

By means of the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 23.12.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 whereby brick kiln licence has been cancelled.

On the basis of the consent the brick kiln licence was granted later on, after the death of Sri Brahm Dutt Trivedi on 03.06.2016, the concerned authority directed the petitioner to submit its consent under Rule 7 of the bye-laws framed under the Zila Panchayat Act and in the absence of the consent, the impugned order has been passed. As per impugned order, no consent since 2013 has been given, furthermore, even for the year 2017-18 consent has not been given.

Short counter affidavit has been filed by Chairman Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Lucknow, in which it has been stated that the brick kiln was established on 08.12.2010, thereafter necessary consent orders were obtained for the year 2011 to 2013 and since 2013 the petitioner has not submitted consent order either under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act nor under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and therefore, no consent has been granted by Pollution Control Board, Lucknow in favour of the petitioner. It is also submitted that as per letter dated 15.11.2017, the petitioner has to file an application for consent and in the absence of the same, no permission under the aforesaid Act has been done.

Considering the aforesaid and in the absence of the consent under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act as well as under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, no permission can be granted to the petitioner to run the Brick Kiln or to renew its licence.

The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

[Alok Mathur,J.] [Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.] Order Date :- 13.11.2019 S.Ali