Authority: High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital

Order Date: 16 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: M/s Garg & Garg CO., a registered partnership firm engaged in civil/road infrastructure construction and the contracted road‑construction agency of GREF/BRO.
  • Respondents: State of Uttarakhand (Respondent No.1) and Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board (Respondent No.2).
  • Contract Details: The petitioner was awarded the strategic work of providing and laying GSB 100 mm, Crusher Run Macadam Base (CRM) 100 mm, DBM 60 mm and BC 40 mm including Prime Coat, Tack Coat, Road Marking with Thermoplastic Paint 2.5 mm thick and Road Studs (100 × 100 mm) between KM 22.68 to KM 46.58 on Nyusobla‑Sela‑Tedang Road, as per MoRT&H Specifications (Fifth Revision) under reference 67 RCC/765/BRTF/CE (P) Hirak, via a letter of acceptance dated 19‑01‑2026 from the Border Road Organization (BRO) Headquarters, Chief Engineer, Project Hirak.
  • Petitioner’s Request: Permission to install a temporary mobile crushing plant for captive use during construction of the border road.
  • Initial Rejection: The application was declined based on a head‑office letter dated 27‑05‑2025, which directed that no new stone‑crushing units be permitted until dedicated crushing and dumping zones are identified in each district, as mandated by the order in WPMB No.281 of 2025 (Mahendra Singh & Another vs. Union of India & Others).
  • Relevant Prior Order: The operative part of WPMB No.281/2025 called upon the Secretary, Mining, Government of Uttarakhand and the Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board to earmark dedicated zones for crushing and dumping within six weeks, and to keep permission for new stone‑crushing units on hold until that exercise is completed.
  • Petitioner’s Argument: The mobile crushing unit is temporary, intended solely for captive use, and its denial would impede contract performance and harm national interest.
  • Supporting Precedent: An order dated 30‑12‑2025 in the same PIL (WPMB No.281/2025) allowed a temporary mobile crushing plant for the Jamrani Dam Multipurpose Project, recognizing its captive‑use nature.

Final Outcome

  • The Court, after considering the strategic importance of the BRO border‑road project and the temporary, captive‑use nature of the crushing unit, held that the earlier 22‑05‑2025 order should not impede the petitioner’s application.
  • The Court directs Respondent No.2 (Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board) to pass an appropriate order on the petitioner’s application for a captive mobile crushing plant located at Village Sela, Patti Dugtu, Khata No. 00015, Khasra No. 847, Tehsil Dharchula, District Pithoragarh, within four weeks from the date of this order.
  • Counsel for Respondent No.2 is instructed to communicate this order to the respondent for compliance.
  • Any pending applications, if any, are hereby disposed of.

Topics: Legal Judgment, Infrastructure Development