Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
  • Amicus Curiae: Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Advoate and Mr. Aagney Sail, Advocate
  • Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mr. Anil Soni, AAG
  • Respondent No. 3: Mr. A.R Takkar and Ms. Gurinderjit, Advocates
  • Applicant/Appellant: None present
  • Respondent No. 1: Mr. A.D.N Rao and Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 2 (in Application No. 43 & 27THC/2013): Mr. A.R Takkar, Adv. along with Ms. Gurunjeet Singh, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 2 (in Application No. 44/2013) Mr. Raktim Gogai, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 3 (in Application No. 44 & 54(THC)/2013): Mr. A.R Takkar, Adv. along with Ms. Gurunjeet Singh, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 5 (in Applications No. 27 & 44 (THC)/2013)
  • Respondent No. 3 (in Applications No. 43 (THC)/2013)
  • Respondent No. 7 (in Applications No. 54 (THC)/2013): Mr. P.N Puri and Ms. Reeta Puri, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 4 (in Application No. 43(THC)/2013): Mr. T.S Joseph, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 4 (in Application No. 44 & 54(THC)/2013): Mr. Shubham Bhalla, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 8 (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013): Mr. Hitesh Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Watts, Supdt.
  • Respondent No. 9 (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013) Mr. Narender Hooda and Mr. Devender Pratap Singh, Advs. and Mr. Vineet Malik, Advs.
  • Chandigarh PCC (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013) Mr. Shubham Bhalla., Adv.
  • Respondent No. 8: In OA No. 54/2013 (THC) Mr. Raktim Gogoi, Advocate
Judges
  • Swatanter Kumar
  • Chairperson
  • U.D Salvi, J.M
  • D.K Agrawal, E.M
  • B.S Sajwan, E.M
  • R.C Trivedi, E.M
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
  • Amicus Curiae: Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Advoate and Mr. Aagney Sail, Advocate
  • Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mr. Anil Soni, AAG
  • Respondent No. 3: Mr. A.R Takkar and Ms. Gurinderjit, Advocates
  • Applicant/Appellant: None present
  • Respondent No. 1: Mr. A.D.N Rao and Mr. Sudipto Sircar, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 2 (in Application No. 43 & 27THC/2013): Mr. A.R Takkar, Adv. along with Ms. Gurunjeet Singh, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 2 (in Application No. 44/2013) Mr. Raktim Gogai, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 3 (in Application No. 44 & 54(THC)/2013): Mr. A.R Takkar, Adv. along with Ms. Gurunjeet Singh, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 5 (in Applications No. 27 & 44 (THC)/2013)
  • Respondent No. 3 (in Applications No. 43 (THC)/2013)
  • Respondent No. 7 (in Applications No. 54 (THC)/2013): Mr. P.N Puri and Ms. Reeta Puri, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 4 (in Application No. 43(THC)/2013): Mr. T.S Joseph, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 4 (in Application No. 44 & 54(THC)/2013): Mr. Shubham Bhalla, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 8 (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013): Mr. Hitesh Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Watts, Supdt.
  • Respondent No. 9 (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013) Mr. Narender Hooda and Mr. Devender Pratap Singh, Advs. and Mr. Vineet Malik, Advs.
  • Chandigarh PCC (in Application No. 27(THC)/2013) Mr. Shubham Bhalla., Adv.
  • Respondent No. 8: In OA No. 54/2013 (THC) Mr. Raktim Gogoi, Advocate
Judges
  • Swatanter Kumar
  • Chairperson
  • U.D Salvi, J.M
  • D.K Agrawal, E.M
  • B.S Sajwan, E.M
  • R.C Trivedi, E.M
See more information ...
Smart Summary

    Court On Its Own Motion v. State Of Punjab

    Item No. 10 to 14 March 26, 2014

    We have perused the Report of the Committee which has been filed before the Tribunal on 14 January, 2014. In the Report short term and long term measures have been suggested. Let the State of Punjab file an Affidavit stating that as to what steps have been taken in furtherance to this Report till today as more than two months are over.

    We direct the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Amritsar and Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana to be present before the Tribunal on the next date of hearing and inform the Tribunal as to what steps have actually been taken on the ground level and the money that has been spent and its effect on the underground water so far as on reduction in contamination of underground water.

    The learned Amicus Curiae also submits that in relation to Hoshiyarpur the underground water has been seriously contaminated. Let the Pollution Control Board take samples for analysis and place the Report on the underground water contamination before the Tribunal on the next date of hearing.

    The Report also shall state first the work done after 31 March, 2014.

    List these matters on 06 May, 2014.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.
    Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

    Comments

    Court On Its Own Motion v. State Of Punjab
    (Mar 26, 2014)