·The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari J — These appeals have been filed by the appellants against a common judgment dated 26th July 2004 passed by learned Single Judge in SBCWP No 1065/2003 Stone Crusher Association Of Rajasthan & Ors and SBCWP No 1066/2002 Rajasthan Half
Get free access to the complete judgment in SHREEHARI STONE CRUSHER v M/S LAKSHAY DEVELOPERS on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in SHREEHARI STONE CRUSHER v M/S LAKSHAY DEVELOPERS on CaseMine Log In 233 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM A
·1 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No Parties Name 9613 of 2019 M/S Bhagwati Stone Crusher Vs Sheikh Nizam Mansoori Bench Constituted Hon ble Shri Justice Vishal Dhagat Whether approved for reporting Yes/No
1 ccc no 100312 of 2022 in the high court of karnataka dharwad bench dated this the 12 th day of january 2023 present the hon ble mr justice and the hon ble mr justice umesh m adiga
Rajasthan High Court M/S Haryana Stone Crusher vs Raj State Pollution Control on 20 July 2010 This court vide its judgment dated quashed and set aside the order dated and remitted the matter to the State Board for deciding the matter afresh The petitioner appeared before the Chairman of the State Board and submitted
·m/s vasavi stone crusher v THE STATE OF KARNATAKA In these writ petitions petitioners have challenged the orders passed by third respondent whereunder application filed by the respective petitioners for establishment of stone crushing unit has been rejected for the reasons indicated thereunder
·JUDGMENT Dated this the 27 th day of October 2022 The 1 st and 2 nd respondents had entered into an agreement with respect to the work up gradation of the road from Thalassery to Valavupara At the instance of the contractor / 2 nd respondent materials for the work was supplied by the petitioner Difference of opinion between the 1
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/s Vision Stone Crusher v The Government of Andhra Pradesh on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in M/s Vision Stone Crusher v The Government of Andhra Pradesh on CaseMine On 25 10 2010 this Court issued the following interim direction to 5 th respondent
WPs 3685TO3692 4930&4931/17 1 Common Judgment IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO 3685/2017 Jai Gajanan Stone Crusher through its Proprietor/Partner Namdeo Ananda Bhonde Aged about 46 years Resident of Pimprideshmukh Tq
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S GREWAL STONE CRUSHER v STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S GREWAL STONE CRUSHER v STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS on CaseMine IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 221 CWP
·The Karnataka Land Revenue Act has been amended by insertion of sub Section 9 to Section 95 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964 with effect from January 8 2015 It contemplates that where an application for conversion is made for the purpose of quarrying minor minerals whether specified or non specified the owner must apply along
Himachal Pradesh High Court M/S Lakhwinder Sigh Stone Crushers vs Uoi & Ors on 7 November 2023 Bench Mamidanna Satya Ratna Sri Ramachandra Rao Jyotsna Rewal Dua M/s Lakhwinder Sigh Stone Crushers & CWP of 2023 Present Mr Sahil Singla Mr Sachit Singla and Mr Arvind Sharma
·Get free access to the complete judgment in Shiva Stone Crusher v State Of Karnataka on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in Shiva Stone Crusher v State Of Karnataka on CaseMine This Court has held that the Licencing Authority cannot direct the applications for granting licences should not be
·The apex court while relying upon a judgment of the madras high court in t K S M Kalyanasundaram vs Kalyani ammap held in para 5 as follows "in t K S M Kalyanasundaram vs Kalyani ammal 5 supra the madras high court held that the alleged nuisance would have been in existence for a long period The circumstance and the
·get free access to the complete judgment in malabar stone crusher v kerala state electricity board ltd on casemine in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present the honourable mr justice raja vijayaraghavan v thursday the 16 th day of february 2023 / 27th magha 1944
Get free access to the complete judgment in Maa Vindhya Stone Crushing Company And Another Petitioner v State Of And Others on CaseMine Issue notice to all the added respondent except respondent No 8 returnable on In addition to Court notice the petitioner to serve notice to all the added respondent except respondent No
·Get free access to the complete judgment in Ceeyen Stone Crusher v State Of Kerala on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in Ceeyen Stone Crusher v State Of Kerala on CaseMine Log In India; Kasargod District extending Hectors of land as applied vide Exhibit P7 within a time fixed by this Hon ble
37 A WP 838 2021 J odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO 838 of 2021 M/s Komal Stone Crusher PETITIONER Komal Construction Company The Eligible Industrial Unit under the package Scheme of Incentives 2007 situated at Survey /2 Mouza Shripur
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S MAMTA STONE CRUSHER v ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE on CaseMine
·Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S V S R STONE CRUSHER v THE SECRETARY on CaseMine Get free access to the complete judgment in M/S V S R STONE CRUSHER v THE SECRETARY on CaseMine Log In It is submitted that the writ petition pending before this Court in /2021 has been already
·IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition M/S No 1767 of 2017 M/S Sidhbali Stone Crusher & othersPetitioners State of Uttarakhand & With Writ Petition M/S No 433 of 2017 Ajeet Stone IndustriesPetitioner Union of India & OthersRespondents Ms Sheetal Advocate
·Get free access to the complete judgment in Anjani Stone v State Of Andhra on CaseMine
·petitions are fully covered by a judgment of this Court dated passed in WP C /2021 titled M/s Trikuta Stone Crusher v Union Territory of J&K and others and clubbed matters and therefore can be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment 2 Mr learned appearing for the respondents does not dispute