Hikal Ltd vs. Union Of India

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:22 Mar 2024
CNR:SCIN010114992024

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

FRESH

Before:

Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble J.B. Pardiwala, Hon'ble Manoj Misra

Stage:

FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES

Remarks:

Disposed off

Listed On:

22 Mar 2024

In:

Judge

Category:

UNKNOWN

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.6532/2024

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-02-2024 in WP No.1124/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay)

HIKAL LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(With IA No.67042/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.67045/2024-PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES and IA No.67041/2024-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 22-03-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. Mr. Akshay Patil, Adv. Mr. Jarin Doshi, Adv. Mr. Nilesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Awantika Manohar, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, Adv. M/s. Ap & J Chambers

For Respondent(s) Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, Sr. Adv.

Page 1 of 2

Ms. Aastha Mehta, Adv. Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR Ms. Prerana Mohapatra, Adv. Ms. Yasha Goyal, Adv.

UPON perusing papers the Court made the following O R D E R

  • 1 The High Court of Judicature at Bombay by its impugned order dated 22 February 2024 has declined to entertain the writ petition though it prima facie came to the conclusion that the writ petition was maintainable.
  • 2 Since the challenge was to the orders of the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal, we are of the view that it is unnecessary to entertain the Special Leave Petition bearing in mind the fact that the petitioner would have remedies against the order of the NGT. In that event, it only needs to be clarified, which we do, that the observations contained, if any, in the impugned order will not come in the way of the recourse to the appellate remedies for the petitioner.
  • 3 The Special Leave Petition is accordingly disposed of.
  • 4 Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar