JUDGMENT : 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that I.A. no. 7610 of 2018 has been filed for amendment of the writ petition challenging the order dated 21.08.18 which has been passed by the Respondent no 1 during the pendency of this case refusing to grant consent to operate to the petitioner. The other I.A No. 7613 OF 2018 has been filed for grant of interim relief. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that said I.A. has been filed challenging the order passed by the Pollution Control Board whereby a decision has been taken to deny the grant of Consent to Operate to the petitioner and their application has been rejected and the basis of taking the decision is the proceedings before the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change. He submits that Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change has to take a decision and the clearance given by the Ministry has not yet been withdrawn and therefore the entire matter is depending on the decision which has to be taken by the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change and he submits that the matter pending before the ministry of the Union of India and the order passed by the pollution control board are inter related, therefore petition for amendment may be allowed. 4. He further submits that pursuant to the order dated 16.07.2018, the aforesaid ministry of Union of India has filed a counter affidavit. Union of India has made specific statement that pursuant to the show cause dated 6.6.2012 issued to the petitioner, they are in a position to take final decision in the matter. The counsel submits that a date of hearing in the matter will be shortly fixed for hearing on the reply which has been filed by the petitioner. 5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-Union of India, it is apparent that respondent-Union of India is willing to give hearing to the petitioner taking a final decision on the show cause issued to the petitioner as back as in the year 2012. Counsel further submits that along with the counter affidavit filed in which certain allegations have been made. He submits that the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions is intending and willing to file appropriate application before the respondent no. Counsel further submits that along with the counter affidavit filed in which certain allegations have been made. He submits that the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions is intending and willing to file appropriate application before the respondent no. 3 i.e Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Government of India, New Delhi, at the time of hearing of the show cause and/or within ten days from today for regularization of any irregularity which might have been committed by the petitioner in connection with the location of plant of the petitioner or in connection with the allegations made against the petitioner. He submits that appropriate order be passed indicating that show cause reply of the petitioner be considered together with the aforesaid application to be filed by the petitioner for regularization, to settle the entire dispute and the petitioner would know as to what is to be done with the industry. 6. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submits that show cause was issued as back as in the year 2012, but for one reason or the other, the decision on the same has not been taken. However they are likely to take an appropriate decision in the matter in a very short time, and they have to give a hearing to the petitioner and pass final order. He submits that so far as stand of the petitioner in connection with filing application for regularisation of the alleged irregularities etc. in connection with any deviation or any violation of the conditions of environmental clearance is concerned, they are free to take steps for the aforesaid purpose in accordance with law. He has referred to the circulate issued by Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests dated 22nd January 2010 which provides that : “.......any shift in location after holding of public hearing will be deemed to be a new proposal and will be appraised afresh as per the procedure prescribed under EIA Notification, 2006 provided the respective Expert Appraisal recorded in the minutes and prior approval of Advisor SEIAA for Category ‘A’/Category ‘B’ projects respectively is obtained for not holding the public hearing for the engaged location afresh.” 7. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Pollution Control Board submits that the unit of the petitioner has not been situated on the same location for which approval of the Union Ministry was taken and accordingly the impugned order has been rightly passed. She also submits that the Unit of the petitioner is situated on forest land. However, she could not dispute the fact that the decision of the Pollution Control Board is directly dependent on the decision which is yet to be taken by the Ministry of Forest and Environment and Climate Change pursuant to aforesaid show cause notice issued in the year 2012. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties and after considering the materials on record this court finds that the issue involved in the order dated 21.08.18 which has been passed by the Respondent no 1 during the pendency of this case, refusing to grant consent to operate to the petitioner, has been co-related to the decision to be taken by the respondent no 3 pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner in the year 2012 and the hearing in the matter is likely to be given shortly by the respondent no 3. Accordingly the petition for amendment of the writ petition i.e. I.A. No. 7610 of 2018 challenging the order dated 21.08.2018 passed by the State Pollution Control Board is hereby allowed. 9. Counsel for the petitioner is directed to file the amended writ petition and serve copies upon the respondents within a period of one week from today. The respondents may file their response to the amended writ petition within a period of two weeks thereafter. 10. So far as interim relief is concerned, this court finds that the order passed by the respondent-Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board dated 23.08.2018 appears to be directly dependent on the final decision which is yet to be taken by the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change on the show cause issued to the petitioner as back as in the year 2012. As per the submission made by the counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India, they are shortly going to take a final decision in the matter after hearing the petitioner. As per the submission made by the counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India, they are shortly going to take a final decision in the matter after hearing the petitioner. Accordingly the operation, implementation and execution of the order dated 23.08.2018 passed by Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board is hereby stayed till 27.09.2018 and the interim order dated 16.07.2018 is hereby extended till 27.09.2018. 11. So far as decision of the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change are concerned, considering the fact that the unit of the petitioner is running unit and large number of employees are working in this unit of the petitioner, this court consider it appropriate that the issue regarding the environmental clearance of the petitioner should be decided at the earliest. 12. It is further observed that it is open to the petitioner to approach the Union of India with their proposal/application for regularization of the alleged violation, without prejudice to their rights (including right, title , interest , possession and nature of property of the petitioner) and advance submissions before the respondent authority of Union of India pursuant to the show cause notice issued to them dated 6.6.2012 and the appropriate authority may, if possible, simultaneously consider the aforesaid application of the petitioner for regularization along with the show cause reply of the petitioner such that entire dispute is decided and the petitioner may also have a clarity about the fate of its unit. The decision which is to be taken by the Union of India be brought on record by either of the parties by filing supplementary affidavit latest by 25.09.2018. 13. I.A. No. 7610 of 2018 and I.A No. 7613 OF 2018 are hereby disposed of. 14. It is made clear that this court has not gone into the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it will be open to the respondent no 3 to take decision as per law. 15. Post this case on 27.09.2018. 16. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the counsel for the parties. Petition disposed of.