AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr. Saikia, C.J.—Heard Mr. Pranav Kohli, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. U. K. Jalali, learned Senior counsel assisted by
Mr. M. K. Sharma, for respondent no.1 and Mr. P. S. Chandel, learned Standing counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 5.
The interlocutory order dated May 7, 2010, passed by the Writ Court in CMP nos. 723/2010, 724/2010, 657/2010 & 658/2010 arising out of
OWP no. 819/2009, has been assailed in this Letters Patent Appeal. The interim order under challenge reads as under:
In view of the averments made in these CMPs, I find that applicants are necessary parties to the case. Hence, they are arrayed as respondents.
They may file objections to the main petition within two weeks. Copy of report filed by Director Pollution Control Board be given by the Registry
to the learned counsels for the respondents with liberty to file objections, if any, to the report.
On the consensus of the learned counsels, the CMPs are allowed and the order dated April 23, 2020, is modified to the limited extent that
consignment of the respondents who are applicants in the CMPs, which has already reached Govindsar Railway side, may be cleared by the
respondents/applicants by removing the goods from the spot in presence of representative of the petitioners, within two weeks.
No fresh consignment shall be received by the authorities at the Govindsar Station in future and no party/person shall be permitted to remove the
goods/consignment in future, till the final disposal of the matter.
Main matter be listed after two weeks for consideration with liberty to respondents to file objections and complete their pleadings by next date.
When the matter has been placed before the Appellate Court through the instant appeal, this Court by order dated 30.07.2010, has passed the
following order:
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
List this appeal for further consideration after two weeks.
In the meanwhile, direction issued by the Writ Court dated 7.5.2010, which his reproduced herein below, is directed to stay till next date of
hearing:
... No fresh consignment shall be received by the authorities at the Govindsar Station in future and no party/person shall be permitted to remove the
goods/consignment in future, till the final disposal of the matter.
Having heard extensive arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also upon consideration of the records as well as
impugned interim order, including the order passed by this Court on 30.07.2010 quoted above, we are of the view that since an interlocutory
order is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal, instead of deciding the issue on merit by this Court, the interest of justice will be satisfied, if
the matter is remanded back to the Writ Court for its early disposal within a time frame.
At this stage, it is stated at the Bar that the matter has already been placed on Board for final hearing before the Writ Court.
Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the Writ Court with a request to dispose of the connected writ petition, as expeditiously as possible,
preferably within a period of one month from today.
Meanwhile, the parties interested in lis including the appellant herein shall be at liberty to file their respective pleadings/objections at an earliest
date.
Till the disposal of the Writ petition finally, as indicated above, it is provided that interim order impugned to the extent:
No fresh consignment shall be received by the authorities at the Govindsar Station in future and no party/person shall be permitted to remove the
goods/consignment in future, till the final disposal of the matter.
shall be kept in abeyance.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.