c. 1 •J •tl IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBIU\SPUR W.P.(227) N0. -4-1 ^^ OF 2008 PETITIONER / Chief Engineer (Generation), Chhattisgarh i^ti'Stin, pe^f,!?^; ......;••-'{„ State Electricity Board, Korba West, Tehsil > wo.z -Jy3^,l,^^;^)»&n Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ^•-'•^w'f's,....•••••••''' p-ft-^"^^w-^- ^^.^"^.^sA^-""" RESPONDENTS VERSUS C<r>ii£w*fc:<"v // 1. Chhattisgarh Environment Aeteetiefl-Board Through it's Regional Officgr, .QffJQe^of the ^\ .^ ^ R^>1^i^^ Chhattisgarh Environment^^^^oard A^ ""''-^'^-r Near Tehsil Office, Rampur, Korba District ^ Korba, Chhattisgarh ^l , , .& f?.-tl-f(.nii. ctfcq),'^ /2. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the <;- District Magistrate, District Korba, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OR WRITS IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARLDIRECTION^R^DLRECTiONS, ORDER OR ORDERS, ORTHELIKE s&h., '•"Bii' 3Eli<:'ifiks! HIGHCOURT OFCHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA. J. W.P. (2271 No. 4176 of 2008 PETITIONER Chief Engineer (GeneraUon) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Versus RESPONDENTS Chhattisgarh Environment Consen/ation Board and another. Shri R.S. Marhas, counsel forthe petjtjoner. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, counsel for the respondent No.1. Shri AJay Dwlvedi, Deputy Govt.Advocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (17/02/2011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. Heard. (2) The respondent No.1 has filed a complaint under Section 22 and 22(A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and under Section 7,8 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. In the said complaint Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Korba (West) and Chief Engineer (Generation) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Korba (West) has been arrayed as accused. (3) Petitioner moved an application under Section 212 of Cr.P.C. inter alia submitting that the individuals having not been made accused, the complaint is not maintainable. Application has been rejected by the learned Magistrate as well as bythe Revisional Court. (4) Quashment of complaint has not been sought on any other ground .»except indicated above. (5) In view of the above, it is for the petitioner to submit names of the ofRcerswho are posted at the relevant point of tlme when the subject violation of law is taking place or have taken place. The petitioner shall submit name of such officers who should be arrayed as accused befor® the Magistrate, withina period offourweeks from today. (6) With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge l-s.