BIKASH DEY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. B. Devi, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners in WP(C) 4917/2022and Mr. N. Islam, learned counsel for the writ petitioners in WP(C) 2791/2019. Mr. C.K.S. Baruah, learned Government Advocate, Assam, has appeared on behalf of the respondent nos. 4, 5, 7 and 8 in WP(C) 4917/2022 and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and DM Department, Assam, is present on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 4 in WP(C) 2791/2019. Mr. S. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, Pollution Control Board, Assam, has appeared on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 and 6 in WP(C) 4917/2022 and respondent no. 3 in WP(C) 2791/2019. Mr. S. Ghosh, learned counsel is present on behalf of the private respondent in both the writ petitions.

(2.) The petitioners in both the writ petitions are basically aggrieved by the "consent to establish" as well as "consent to operate" issued by the Pollution Control Board (PCB), Assam permitting the private respondent to set up a brick klin over his private patta land situated in village Rajyeswerpur Part-I, PS- Lala, Borbond in the district of Hailakandi, inter-alia contending that the "brick klin" has been set up over agricultural land, without converting the land and also without obtaining the 'NOC' from the villagers.

(3.) Ms. B. Devi, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the land over which the "brick klin" has been set up is agricultural land. Therefore, under the relevant rules, no "brick klin" could have been established over such agricultural land. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the district Administration is yet to re-classify the land as "Non Agricultural Land" and, therefore, in view of the provisions contained in Sec. 3 and 4 of the Assam Agricultural Land (Regulation of Re-classification and Transfer for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2015, no brick klin could have been established over the said plot of land.