APHC010132692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 6891/2025 Between: 1. THALARI MUNI RAJA, S/O MUNI RATHANIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O CHALIVENDRA, VADDIGUNTA KANDRIGA, CHIGURUPADU POST, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 2. GUNTUPUDI RAMBABU, S/O GUNTUPUDI POLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O CHALIVENDRA, VADDIGUNTA KANDRIGA, CHIGURUPADU POST, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, FORESTS, ENVIRONMENT, AND SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE A P POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, API 1C COLONY ROAD, GURUNANAK COLONY, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 4. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, REGIONAL OFFICE. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, APSFC BUILDING, BALAJI CITY, TIRUPATI. 5. THE MENAKURU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MENAKURU VILLAGE, NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6. YUGANDHAR REDDY, S/O SIVA SANKAR REDDY R/O CHALIVENDRA, VADDIGUNTA KANDRIGA, CHIGURUPADU POST, 2 NAIDUPETA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR FORESTS 3. YELISETTI SOMARAJU STANDING COUNSEL APPCB 4. SUDHIR MATTEGUNTA The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, Ms. Sravani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests, Sri YelisettiSoma Raju, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 & 4 and Sri P.A.K. Yadav, learned Counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat. 2. Sri Yelisetti Soma Raju, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 & 4 has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board Regional Office, Tirupati (Respondent No.4) dated 20.04.2025 along with certain photographs. Copies of it are supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same are taken on record. 3. The relevant portion of the Written Instructions is usefully extracted hereunder: “In this regard, the Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, APPCB, Tirupati inspected the proposed location on 20.04.2025 and observed the following: 1. The Board has not issued any Consent to Establish (CTE) for the proposed Ready-Mix Concrete (RMC) unit proposed 3 at Sy.No.196-1, Chalivendra (V), Chigurupadu Post, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District. 2. The RMC unit has not yet been established at Sy.No.196-1, Chalivendra (V), Chigurupadu Post, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District. The unit has dug pits for the foundation and partially filled with concrete. Additionally, the unit has received a machine pertaining to the RMC unit. The RMC unit is not yet established at the said location. 3. The representative of the proposed industry, Sri. S. Yugandhar Reddy, informed that they have dropped the plan to establish an RMC unit at Sy. No.196-1, Chalivendra (V), Chigurupadu Post, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District. He stated that they would establish the RMC unit at another location away from the habitation and would obtain the necessary permissions from the APPCB.” 4. The above extract would indicate that the Unofficial Respondent No.6 has dropped the idea of establishing a Ready-mix Concrete (RMC) Plant/Unit proposed at Sy.No.196-1, Chalivendra Village, Chigurupadu Post, Naidupeta Mandal, Tirupati District on account of the objections raised by several persons in the neighbourhood. 5. Sri Yelisetti Soma Raju, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 & 4 would therefore submit that Ready-mix Concrete Unit will be established in a different survey number. 6. In terms of the Written Instructions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition at the admission stage. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the above extract of the Written Instructions. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 21.04.2025 DSV