High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 09 KAR CK 0883

M/s. India Iron Works vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board & Ors.

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru Bench · Decided on 1 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vibhu Bakhru, C.J · K.S. Hemalekha, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
WRIT PETITION NO.106920 OF 2025 (GM-POL) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.106921 OF 2025 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.107319 OF 2025 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.107321 OF 2025 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.100345 OF 2026 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.100346 OF 2026 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.100347 OF 2026 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.100348 OF 2026 (GM-POL) WRIT PETITION NO.100349 OF 2026 (GM-POL)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 309 words

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1.

These batch of petitions were listed yesterday and were adjourned, as the learned counsel appearing for the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board [KSPCB] sought time to seek instructions.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the KSPCB submits that the very same petitioners have already filed petitions before this Court seeking similar reliefs, which are currently pending consideration before this Court. He handed over a copy of the order sheet in one such petition, W.P. No.30110/2025, filed by M/s. India Iron Works. The order sheet indicates that the said petition was moved on 30.09.2025 and the learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to place on record the Consent for Establishment [CFE] and Consent for Operation [CFO]. It was also clarified that if the same was not placed on record, an adverse inference would be drawn. He states that similar orders were passed in other petitions as well.

3.

It is apparent that the petitioner does not have the CFO and is operating the industry without the necessary compliances. It is further noted that the aforementioned petition (W.P. No.30110/2025) was thereafter listed on five occasions to enable the petitioner to cure the office objections. However, the same have not been cured. It is apparent that having failed to secure any interim orders in W.P. No.30110/2025, the petitioners have now filed the present petitions.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the present petitions.

5.

In our view the filing of these petitions constitutes an abuse of the process of law and warrants composition of costs. Accordingly, the present petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. However, we consider it apposite to impose costs of `10,000/- in respect of each petition. The costs shall be paid to the Karnataka Advocates’ Clerks Benevolent Trust, Bengaluru, within a period of four weeks from date.