petitions are fully covered by a judgment of this Court dated 19.04.2021. passed in WP(C) No.308/2021 titled M/s Trikuta Stone Crusher v. Union. Territory of J&K and others and clubbed matters and, therefore, can be. disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. 2. Mr. F.A.Natnoo, learned appearing for the respondents does not. dispute …

12. Recently the Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Sudhir Kumar Singh, 2020 SCC Online SC 847 elaborately dealt. with the scope and applicability of audi alteram partem rule. Hon'ble. the Supreme Court after surveying the entire case law, in paragraph. No.39 held thus:-"39. An analysis of the aforesaid judgments thus reveals:

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 …

m/s vasavi stone crusher v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA In these writ petitions, petitioners have challenged the orders passed by third respondent whereunder application filed by the respective petitioners for establishment of stone crushing unit has been rejected for the reasons indicated thereunder.

In 1992 the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment against vehicular emissions in India. A retired Supreme Court judge was appointed to recommend measures to control vehicle pollution nationwide, along with three members. ... In a historic event, by order of the Supreme Court on May 15, 1992, 212 stone crushers were …

Suresh Kumar Kodoth, learned counsel appearing R1 and R2, Mukkom Municipality would point out on the basis of the pleadings in the counter affidavit filed by his parties that though Rule 18 of the Municipality Rules 2011 deals with stone crusher units, it has to be borne in mind that conduct of a quarry is more dangerous to the public than a ...

Honorable Judges. Please choose only one of the following. Sitting Judges Select Judge Name. Former Judges Select Judge Name. Reported.

On 15 September 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) delivered a judgment in the matter of State of Uttarakhand v Kumaon Stone …

Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S BALAJI STONE CRUSHER v. DEEPAK KUMAR on CaseMine. Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S BALAJI STONE CRUSHER v. DEEPAK KUMAR on CaseMine. Log In. India; ... Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and …

12. Recently the Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Sudhir Kumar Singh, 2020 SCC Online SC 847 elaborately dealt with the scope and applicability of audi alteram partem rule. Hon'ble the Supreme Court after surveying the entire case law, in paragraph No.39 held thus:- "39. An analysis of the aforesaid judgments thus reveals:

Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S. Aman Stone Crusher v. State Of M.P & Another on CaseMine. Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S. Aman Stone Crusher v. State Of M.P & Another on CaseMine. ... vide order dt.29.6.2013 dismissed the appeal on the ground that a Special Leave Petition was pending before …

Get free access to the complete judgment in Gayathri Stone Crusher, Rep. By Its Proprietor Sri. on CaseMine. Get free access to the complete judgment in Gayathri Stone Crusher, Rep. By Its Proprietor Sri. on CaseMine. ... Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your …

16. Sri. Hasnain has placed reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore v. ELGI Equipments Ltd.6, National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. Union of India7, Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, New Delhi v.

The petitioner has been also granted a licence under Section 3 of the Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Act, 2011 (for short 'the said Act of 2011') for carrying out crushing activities which is valid up to 20th February 2035. 3. By the impugned order at Annexure-L dated 30th July 2019, the petitioner has been called upon to stop the ...

Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work. ... stated the facts of the case are that the complainant is a company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in stone crushing business. The complainant is already running stone crushing business …

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ... ORGANISATION AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J. The appellant is engaged in the business of providing private security guards to its clients on payment basis. The appellant is registered under the Private Security Agencies ... Court, affirming the order dated …

2017 seeking closure /re-location of the stone crushers. In the said proceeding, the NGT passed an interim order on 10th August, 2017 restricting the operation of both units during …

ORDER ORIGINAL PDF Issues Pet. Arg. Res. Arg. Reasoning Decision M/S SHRI RAM STONE CRUSHER v. THE STATE OF HARYANA IN THE SUPREME …

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.

Justice B.P. Das, Chairman, J. 1. The appellant, M/s. Sarala Stone Crusher represented by its occupier-Shri Biswaranjan Sahoo of Village Gudiakateni, District Dhenkanal, has preferred this appeal under Section 31 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 28.9.2010 passed …

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services -- Free for one month. Supreme Court of India ... The writ petitions filed by the owners/proprietors of stone crushers in Delhi High Court which have been ...

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has allowed the writ petitions by a common judgment dated 14.05.2007. The State of Uttarakhand and State of Uttar Pradesh has filed SLPs, in which leave has been granted, challenging the judgments of the High Courts in so far as writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners were allowed.

i. Hazara Stone Crusher. ii. AnsarMajeed Khan Stone Crusher. iii. Gujjar Stone Crusher. He has also stated that pursuant to the judgment of august Supreme Court of Pakistan operations of the said crushermachines were stopped. Similarly, the Environment Department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Respondents no. 7 & 8,

1. That the Applicant a farmer having agriculture land near the stone crusher units has approached this Hon‟ble Tribunal after several years of endless fight against pollution activities caused by the Mine lease holders and Stone crusher units before Revenue department, Lokayukta, Hon‟ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

Union of India (Stone Crushing Case), 1992 Supp (2) SCC 85, cases relating to Stone crushing operation in the vicinity of Delhi, wherein the total closure of the operation ordered by Union of India and crusher owner instead of approaching the Supreme Court in the pending matters, filed writ petitions in High Court and obtained interim orders ...

5- Issue or pass any order as this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Brief controversy, which emerges out from the facts of the case, is that by the impugned Notifications during Kumbh Mela period, mining and stone crushing activities were restrained by the State Government.

In this petition, the petitioner, inter alia, seeks writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to collect the tax from the petitioner for private land/road where the stone crusher has been installed and to collect the toll tax as per Section 4 of Levy of Toll Tax Act read with Section 2(i) of Levy of Toll Rules from the post where the same ...

Supreme Court of India. ... Appeal (civil) 5654 of 1998 PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P. RESPONDENT: LAL KUNWA STONE CRUSHER (P) LTD. ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/03/2000 BENCH: S. RAJENDRA BABU & S.N. PHUKAN JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2000 (2) SCR 276 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by …

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 …

Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S AMBABHAVANI STONE CRUSHER v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on CaseMine. ... Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a …

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 …

Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S BALAJI STONE CRUSHER v. DEEPAK KUMAR on CaseMine.

By impugned judgment and Order dated 08.01.2009, the High Court has allowed the Writ Petition, by quashing the cut-off date, on the ground that no reasons were forthcoming from the appellant-Corporation, for picking up the cut-off date, i.e, 05.06.1995, for implementation of Pension Scheme. Further, High Court has declared that the Scheme

M/S. J.R.S. Crusher... on CaseMine. ... leasing out his land measuring about 3 acres 84 cents for the purpose of establishing the stone crusher by the partnership firm. The lease deed was also executed on 27.07.2013. ... He would also rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2010 4 CTC 546.