HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34815 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Uttara Bahuguna, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel for respondent no.4 - U.P. Pollution Control Board, Varanasi. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondent No.7. 3. The instant writ petition has been filed praying inter alia for the following relief: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to the State Authorities to take action the Poultry Farm and to close it. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to the respondent No. 2 to decide the representation dated 15.7.2025 & 27.08.2025 given by the petitioner. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to Chief Environment Officer [Circle-6], T.C.-12th, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow to take decision on the recommendation of the Regional Officer U.P.C.B. Varanasi, vide letter dated 09.01.2025." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that private respondent no.7 has established a poultry farm in violation of the Kukut Vikas Niti, 2013 and the guidelines of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). It is further submitted that respondent no.7 failed to obtain the requisite no-objection certificate or licenses from the competent authorities before establishing the farm. The Regional Officer of respondent no.3 – Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPCB), Varanasi, has Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhavya Misra, Bijendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Somya Chaturvedi Vijay Bahadur .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) recommended action against the poultry farm under Section 13(1)(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. It is contended that the inaction of the authorities is endangering public health and violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 5. Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel for respondent no.4 – U.P. Pollution Control Board, Varanasi, has placed detailed instructions on record. In support of her submissions, she relies upon Clause 8.0 of the Regulatory/Monitoring Mechanism for Poultry Farms under the Environmental Guidelines for Poultry Farms, which provides that poultry farms handling more than 25,000 birds at a single location must obtain consent to establish (CTE) and consent to operate (CTO) under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 from the State Pollution Control Board/Pollution Control Committee. She submits that poultry farms fall under the “Green” category, for which the validity of consent is 15 years, and necessary guidelines have been issued to the district-level officers entrusted with monitoring such farms. She further submits that if any application is pending, the competent authority shall consider and decide it in accordance with law. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that, in case any such application is pending consideration, the competent authority shall decide the same expeditiously after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders, including respondent no.7. October 7, 2025 NLY WRIC No. 34815 of 2025 2 (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad