IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18970 of 2011
                  ======================================================
                  Reliance Infratel Ltd.
                                                                        .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                  The State of Bihar & Ors
                                                                       .... .... Respondent/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr. Ashish Giri
                  For the Respondent/s       : Mr. Sanjay Kr No.2 Ga5
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA
                  ORAL ORDER

13 23-02-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In the present application the petitioner seeks for quashing the notice dated 09.07.2010 (Annexure-2 series) and notice dated 03.06.2011 (Annexure-2 series) issued by respondent no. 2 i.e. Bihar State Pollution Control Board, whereby and whereunder show cause has been issued as to why the Board should not pass appropriate direction against the petitioner under Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

Learned counsel for the petitioner after much deliberation submits that rule of fee for filing consent applications is wholly illegal and arbitrary and ultra vires the provisions of the Act, inasmuch as the Bihar State Pollution Control Board was not authorized to impose such fee. He has, thus, prayed that the notification dated 22.09.2009 issued by the respondent Board Patna High Court CWJC No.18970 of 2011 (13) dt.23-02-2017 2/2 under Rule 25(2) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1983 specifying the rates of consent fees as required under Section 21 of the Air Act to be ultra vires the provision of the Air Act and thus liable to be struck down.

Accordingly, this Court feels that the issue at hand be placed before the division bench for adjudication.

List this case before the appropriate bench after obtaining permission of Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice.

(Anjana Mishra, J.) Rakhi U