STATE OF UTTARANCHAL v. M/S. KUMAON STONE CRUSHER | Supreme Court …
crushing of the stone. High Court of Uttarakhand has taken a contrary view in its judgment dated 01.07.2004 in Kumaon Stone Crusher (Supra), as noted above. 62. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners have relied on few judgments of this Court which need to be noticed. Reliance is placed on Two Judge Bench in
stone+crusher | Indian Case Law | Law | CaseMine
This Court in CST v. Lal Kunwa Stone Crusher (P) Ltd...appears to be similar to the definition under consideration. 7. ... In view of the judgment of this Court in Lal Kunwa Stone Crusher (P) Ltd. with which we are in respectful agreement, we find...Kher Stone Crusher v. G.M, District Industries Centre 1990 79 STC 149 MP FB cannot be …
Gram Panchayet vs M/S Om Sai Stone Crusher on 20 …
In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana1, the SEIAA clearance is necessary before stone mining is permitted. Further, there has to be valid lease for the purpose. Stone crushing has to be as per requisite safeguards against pollution.
Decision to revise Standards for crusher industry- Supreme Court
The government decision to revise standards for the operation of a crusher industry has been challenged in the court. Decision to revise Standards for crusher …
K.C. Stone Crushing Co. And Others v. State Of Haryana And …
However, in the said judgement passed by Supreme Court, there is no reference and no discussion in respect of any bar to release of vehicles on superdari. Order dt. 7.5.2019 passed by Honble Supreme Court in In the said case, an order dated 10.1.2019 passed by NGT in . I.A. No. 22/2019 in O.A. No. 670/2018 had been challenged.
State Of Uttaranchal vs M/S. Kumaon Stone Crusher on 15 …
High Court of Uttarakhand has taken a contrary view in its judgment dated 01.07.2004 in Kumaon Stone Crusher (Supra), as noted above. 62. Learned counsel for the writ …
M/S. D.J Stone Crusher v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
The observation of the Supreme Court cannot be termed to be 'obiter dicta' since the Supreme Court has held that the process of concrete by stone crushers is a manufacturing process. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention of the Revenue. …
Ashok Stone Crusher,... v. State Of Uttarakhand...
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 993 of 2004 (M/S), Ms. Gupta Builders v. State of Uttaranchal. In view of the aforesaid judgment, no transit fees can be levied on the petitioner under the Forest Act.
M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors | Judgments | Supreme …
No stone crusher shall operate in the above said area form August 15, 1992 onward. (3) The writ petitions filed by the owners/proprietors of stone crushers in Delhi …
Landmark Judgments – M. C. Mehta Environmental …
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Others Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3727 of 1985 Three landmark judgments and a number of Orders against polluting industries numbering more than fifty thousand in the …
M/S Kc Stone Crushing Co vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 4 …
35. The NGT while passing aforesaid order has referred to four judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the gist of which needs to be noticed and may be stated as under: JUDGEMENT RELEVANT FACTS AND GIST OF JUDGEMENT State of Meghalaya In the said case, a bunch of orders passed by NGT had been Vs.
M/S AMBABHAVANI STONE CRUSHER v. THE STATE OF …
03.05.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-R AND ETC.. THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, R. DEVDAS J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: W.P.6408/2018 C/W W.P.8396/2018 ORDER These two petitions filed by different petitioners have been considered together for the peculiar facts and circumstances, as …
Kumaun Stone Crusher... v. State Of Uttarakhand...
In the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgment dated 26-6-2007 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 993 of 2004(M/B) M/s Gupta Builders v.
VINOD KUMAR JANGRA v. STATE OF HARYANA
Shri Ram Stone Crusher & Ors. vs. The State of Haryana & Ors. were filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Court on 10.04.2023 and 24.02.2023 directed the applicants to file application within a period of two weeks from the date of order and to dispose of the matter after giving opportunity of hearing. 4.
Wesley Doloi v. State Of Meghalaya And Others | Meghalaya High Court
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court by various judgments has deprecated the nondisclosure of relevant and complete facts while seeking remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A case in point, is the decision in Prestige Lights Ltd. v. State Bank Of India ., (2007) 8 SCC 449 where in paragraphs 33 to 35 it has been held as follows: "33.
Anu Stone Crusher & Etc. v. Bank Of India & Ors.
(1) The order passed in writ petition no. 5768/2008 (m/s, anu stone crusher v. Bank of india and others) will also govern the disposal of wrti petition no. 5770/2008 (M/s. Bajaj Stone Crusher v. Bank of India and others) and writ petition no. 5781/2008 (m/s. Saroj stone crusher v. Bank of india and others).
Mohit Stone Crusher v. Phool Singh & Ors. | Punjab & Haryana High Court
Union of India 1992 SCC 256 as also notification dated 18.12.1992 issued by the Government of Haryana came to the conclusion that installing of stone crusher was actionable nuisance and was otherwise in violation of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the judgment passed by this Court and accordingly restrained the …
State Of Uttaranchal vs M/S. Kumaon Stone Crusher on 15 …
It is thus necessary to note the facts giving rise to above mentioned three judgments. (1) Judgment dated 01.07.2004 in Writ Petition No. 1124 (MB) of 2001, M/s Kumaon Stone Crusher vs. 9 State of U.P. & Ors. [Giving rise to Civil Appeal (arising out of SLP No. 19445 of 2004, State of Uttaranchal & Ors. vs. State of Kumaon Stone Crusher and ...
Dishonour of Cheque | Is it mandatory for trial court to award …
Delhi High Court: Anu Malhotra, J., held that the provision of Section 143A of the NI Act, 1881 is directory in nature and not mandatory. Petitioners were stated to be the directors as per the complaints i.e. CC NI Act 12-20 and CC NI Act 100-20 filed by the respondent before the trial court under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the NI Act, …
SERVICE TAX ON MINING ROYALTY – Digest of case laws
Seven Judges Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of India Cement Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Others, (1990) 1 SCC 12 has already held that mining royalty is a tax. However, the said judgment of Supreme Court in India Cements has been referred to Nine Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Mineral Area Development Authority ...
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 218 …
12. On 11.12.2018, after the Supreme Court remand, the NGT passed a fresh order disposing of the O.A. No. 332/2017 whereby the onus was shifted to the State Government to assess the functioning of the stone crushers and in the event, they are found violating any of the environmental norms, steps were to be taken for closure of the offending units.
MS SAPTAGIRI STONE CRUSHER v. THE STATE OF …
Placing reliance on the above said judgment, he would submit to this Court that the issue involved in the present case is identical and the said issue is covered by the judgment passed by this Court in W.P.2035/2020. 6. We have perused the judgment passed by this Court in the above said writ petition.
MC Mehta vs. Union of India (1986) : case analysis
The Court found the application asking for modification of certain orders and based on the order for which the Supreme Court pronounced another order on 10th March 1986. The final judgement separately dealing with constitutionally significant questions was pronounced by a five-judge bench (also known as the Constitution Bench under Article …
M/S Sarswati Stone Crushers ... vs Urja Vibhag on 14 February, …
Brief facts of the case are that the respondent - firm is a partnership firm and carrying out the business of crushing stones by installing a crusher unit in part of …
Radhey Stone Crusher (M/S.) v. Rajasthan State Pollution
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by. Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.:— Since all these writ petitions relate to refusal to operate the Stone Crushers in villages Indroli, Angrawali, and Fatehpur in Tehsil Kaman District Bharatpur under the provisions of Section 21A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 by the Rajasthan …
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union Of India And Others | Supreme Court …
Union Of India And Others Supreme Court Of India Nov 16, 1999; Subsequent References; CaseIQ (AI Recommendations) ... Out of 98 stone-crusher owners, only 15 stone-crusher owners had raised construction of one-room tenements of residential plots. ... This amounts to violation of various directions issued by this Court in its judgment …
Case Analysis: Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India & Ors.
Introduction The case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India & Ors., is a historic judgement in the field of bonded labour in India. In 1976, Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act was passed. The unembellished requirement of Article 21 is that the bonded labourers must be identified and released and suitably rehabilitated.
M/S MAHAGANAPATHI STONE CRUSHERS v. STATE OF …
period of twenty years from the date of original grant effective from 18.12.2013 valid up till 17.12.2033 in terms of recent amendment to section 5(2) of karnataka regulation of stone crusher amendment act, 2020 w.e.f. 30.03.2020, pursuant to a renewal application dated: 03.09.2018 and representation dated: 13.06.2020 filed by this …
State Of Uttarakhand & Ors. v. Kumaon Stone Crusher | Supreme Court …
It held that the character of Forest Produce is not lost by such crushing of the stone. High Court of Uttarakhand has taken a contrary view in its judgment dated 01.07.2004 in Kumaon Stone Crusher (Supra), as noted above. 63. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners have relied on few judgments of this Court which need to be noticed.
JUDGMENT/ORDER IN
The apex Court in PIL W.P(C)No.651/2005 NEELAMBAR BABA & ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS has not passed any order for stopping the running of the stone crushers and the report of the Central Empowered Committee dated 18.3.2010 is yet to be considered hence, the order dated 19.10.2010 to the effect that Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed …