Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Registrar (J) - Ii
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:28 Sept 2018
CNR:SCIN010180752018

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

FRESH

Before:

Hon'ble Madan B. Lokur, Hon'ble Deepak Gupta

Stage:

FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES

Remarks:

Dismissed

Listed On:

28 Sept 2018

In:

Judge

Category:

UNKNOWN

Interlocutory Applications:

72832/2018,72833/2018,72834/2018,72835/2018,

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

ITEM NO.14

COURT NO.3

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 18075/2018

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 08-12-2017 in OA No. 557/2017 and order dated 08-12-2017 in OA No. 633/2017 passed by the National Green Tribunal)

RAJESH KUMAR DWIVEDI

Petitioner(s)

Respondent $(s)$

VERSUS

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Date: 28-09-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today.

HON'RIF MR. JUSTICE MADAN R. LOKUR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Javant Bhushan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Anand Varma, AOR Mr. Sandeep Singh S., Adv. Ms. Shubhanghi Jain, Adv. Ms. Manpreet Kaur, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Some persons had gone to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and challenged the Sand Mining Policy.

It was stated that certain requirements and conditions under the Sand Mining Policy were not in consonance with the Sand Mining Management Guidelines, 2016 (as amended in 2017). The NGT was of the view that it had no jurisdiction in the matter.

The applicants before the NGT have apparently accepted the In any case, they have not challenged the order in this ∜er. <sup>32</sup>CSurt.

Learned counsel for the appellant is not aware whether those

$\mathbf{1}$

applicants have gone to the appropriate High Court challenging the order passed by the NGT.

The appellant before us is another individual who was not before the NGT and he has challenged the order passed by the NGT. The contention of the appellant is that the NGT does not have jurisdiction. The appellant seeks permission of this Court to file a Civil Appeal.

We are of the view that since the NGT has held that it has no jurisdiction, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the decision of the NGT particularly since another remedy is available to the applicant to approach the High Court.

Therefore, without going into the issues raised, we decline to grant permission to the appellant to file a civil appeal. Of course, he is at liberty to go to the appropriate High Court, which in this case, is the Allahabad High Court and agitate the issues before the said High Court.

(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (ANITA RANI AHUJA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

2