##PAGE1##

Serial No.114

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Case:- CCP(S) No.422/2025 in

WP(C) No.3430/2025

M/s Amar Stone Crusher

…..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. Sumit Moza, Advocate

Vs

R Gopinath, Member Secretary, J&K

Pollution Control Committee, Jammu & Ors.

.….Respondent(s)

Through: Ms. Nazia Fazal, Advocate vice

Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

ORDER

(30.12.2025)

1. The institution of writ petition-WP(C) No.3430/2025

by the petitioner acting through its proprietor Sh.

Mukesh Kumar came to take place on 02.12.2025

impugning therein following orders:

(i) 472JKPCC of 2025 dated 24.11.2025 issued by

J&K Pollution Control Committee.

(ii) Notice No.DM/RSI/2025-26/JC/6850-56 dated

25.11.2025 issued by the Additional District

Magistrate, Reasi, directing implementation of

CCP(S) No.422/2025

2

Order No.472JKPCC of 2025 dated 24.11.2025

of J&K Pollution Control Committee.

2. In addition, the petitioner has also solicited a writ

direction or order unto the respondents not to take

any coercive method/stop the continuing operation of

stone crusher of the petitioner.

3. In the writ petition, it has come to be asserted by the

petitioner that Consent to Operate in its favour is valid

up to April 2027 and despite that, by virtue of

impugned order No.472JKPCC of 2025 dated

24.11.2025, an abrupt revocation of the Consent to

Operate (Renewal) Order No.PCC/

digital/24064572320 of 2024 dated 01.06.2024

came to be issued against the petitioner which meant

to cease the working of the petitioner’s stone crusher

midway.

4. Along with the writ petition-WP(C) No.3430/2025, the

petitioner also preferred CM No.7813/2025 seeking

stay of operation of said two orders.

5. This Court, in terms of order dated 05.12.2025, ordered

issuance of notice to the respondents, which came to be

accepted by the respective counsels of the writ

respondents, which included the J&K Pollution Control

CCP(S) No.422/2025

3

Committee as respondent No.2 and the Deputy

Commissioner, Reasi as respondent No.5.

6. This Court came to pass following direction in its said

order dated 05.12.2025:-

“subject to objections from the other side

and till next date of hearing before the

Bench, status quo with respect to operation

of the petitioner’s unit to be maintained.”

7. In response to an application-CM No.8126/2025 filed by

the petitioner seeking modification with respect to said

direction as given in order dated 05.12.2025, this Court

came to pass an order dated 17.12.2025 to following

effect:-

”Meanwhile, subject to objections from the

other side and till next date of hearing

before the Bench, respondents are directed

to deseal the unit of the

applicant/petitioner. Applicant/petitioner

is also directed to fulfil any discrepancy on

his part by or before the next date of

hearing.

8. In its said application-CM No.8126/2025, the petitioner

came forward stating that the petitioner’s stone crusher

unit came to be placed under seal by the writ respondents

CCP(S) No.422/2025

4

purportedly on the basis of one of the two impugned

orders/communication i.e., order No.DM/DSI/2025-

26/JC/6850-56 dated 25.11.2025 issued from the office

of the District Magistrate, Reasi through the Additional

District Magistrate, Reasi whereby Tehsildar, Reasi had

stood directed to implement the order No. 472JKPCC of

2025 dated 24.11.2025.

9. In the backdrop of the aforesaid scenario, the petitioner

lastly came forward with the institution of the present

contempt petition-CCP(S) No.422/2025 filed on

22.12.2025 stating therein that despite the direction

issued by this Court in terms of order dated 05.12.2025

read with order dated 17.12.2025, the

contemnors/respondents are keeping the premises of the

petitioner in continuing sealing thereby acting in a

deliberate and willful disobedience of the court’s directions

amounting to contempt of the court rendering them liable

for being penalized.

10. In terms of an order dated 23.12.2025, this Court put the

contemnors/respondents on notice with a week’s