VIJAYANAGAR HATCHERIES PVT LTD v. THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
WP/16342/2025 · 2025-07-02
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, Ravi Nath Tilhari
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23037 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23037 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010324672025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO: 16342/2025 Between:
1. VIJAYANAGAR HATCHERIES PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, K SRINIVAS REDDY, REG. ADDRESS FLOOR,
DR. NGRS LOTUS PLAZA, ISUKATHOTA, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P.
1. THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, APIIC, GURUNANAK COLONY, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, A.P.
2. THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE THOTAPALEM, VIZIANAGARAM, A.P.
3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI
4. THE JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE SARPANCH, JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL,
VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 16342/2025 VIJAYANAGAR HATCHERIES PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, K SRINIVAS REDDY, REG. ADDRESS - DOOR NO. 54 FLOOR,
DR. NGRS LOTUS PLAZA, ISUKATHOTA, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, APIIC, GURUNANAK COLONY, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, A.P. THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE - DOOR NO. 8-30-19,
SAI NAGAR, THOTAPALEM, VIZIANAGARAM, A.P.
HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI THE JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL, AGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. THE SARPANCH, JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL,
VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3524] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM VIJAYANAGAR HATCHERIES PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, K DOOR NO. 54-1-9, 4TH FLOOR,
DR. NGRS LOTUS PLAZA, ISUKATHOTA, ...PETITIONER THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, APIIC, GURUNANAK COLONY, THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, 19,
SAI NAGAR, HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI THE JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL, THE SARPANCH, JAYATHI GRAM PANCHAYAT, JAYATHI VILLAGE, MENTADA MANDAL,
VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH. 6.
THE DISTRICT MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 7. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to issue any writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Notice No. PCB/ROVZ/Comp- VZM/2025 dated 18/06/2025 and trying to stop the operation of Petitioners Poultry Farm in Jayathi Village, Mentada Mandal, Vizianagaram District on the instance of Local Political Bodies pressures without there being any violation to Environmental Guidelines is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, against Article 300A of Constitution of India and against the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently set aside Notice No. PCB/ROVZ/Comp-VZM/2025 dated 18/06/2025 issued by the 2nd respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to stay all further proceedings in pursuance to Notice No. PCB/ROVZ/Comp-\/ZM/2025 dated 18/06/2025 issued by the 2nd respondent until disposal of this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. V S MALLIKHARJUNA KULADEEP THOKA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
2. The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 16342/2025
ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)
Heard Sri V.S.Mallikharjuna Kuladeep Thoka, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Yelisetti Soma Raju, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2, Ms.D.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj representing respondent Nos.3, 6 & 7 and Ms.M.Sarada,
learned counsel representing Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 & 5.
2. The petitioner is challenging the show cause notice dated 18.06.2025 issued by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board-respondent No.2 (in short ‘Board’) by which the petitioner has been asked to show cause by submitting reply within the specified time of seven days that the operation of the petitioner industry is without having valid Consent to operate (in short ‘CTO’) and for the said reason as to why the action be not initiated as per the provisions of Section 44 of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution), Act 1974 and Section 37 of Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution), Act, 1981 respectively.
3. The petitioner has submitted reply on 23.06.2025 to the Environmental Engineer, AP Pollution Control Board and it is submitted that the petitioner’s reply is pending before the said authority.
4. While challenging the show-cause notice the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no legal requirement to obtain CTO from the Board in view of the fact that as per the guidelines of the Board dated 19.07.2017 (P3) for any poultry farm the birds being less than one lakh, CTO would not be required. He submits that even as per the show-cause notice, the number of birds found was approximately 62 thousand at the time of inspection in the poultry farm which is less than one lakh.
5. Sri Yelisetti Soma Raju, learned Standing Counsel for the Board submits that Board issued fresh guidelines vide Lr No.APPCB/CTO/CPCB/ Guidelines/Poultry farms/2025 dated 11.06.2025, pursuant to the orders of the National Green Tribunal in OA.No.681 of 2017 dated 16.09.2020 and other OAs as also the previous circular dated 21.01.2022, and according to the new guidelines the CTO from the Board is required if the number of birds is more than 25 thousand, as is the petitioner’s case.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no reference of any such new guidelines, in the show cause notice.
7. Whether the permission is required or not depending upon the number of birds, is a question which at the initial stage, requires consideration by the Board itself as per the relevant guidelines. The petitioner has already submitted the reply to the show cause notice. It is well settled in law that at the stage of show cause notice, the scope of judicial review is very limited. Lack of jurisdiction of the issuing authority could not be shown to us nor that the show
cause notice suffers from any other ground on which judicial review is permissible, at least at this stage.
8.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further pointed out that the petitioner applied for grant of CTO but the application has been rejected on 06.011.2024 vide reference No.3 mentioned in the show cause notice.
9. So far as the present writ petition is concerned, we are not inclined to entertain the same against the show cause notice for the aforesaid reasons.
10. The Writ Petition is dismissed.
11. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order of the rejection, mentioned in show cause notice if so advised, and if the copy of such order has not been served to the petitioner, the respondents shall serve copy of the same.
No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J
Dated:03.07.2025 AG
2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 16342/2025
Dated: 03.07.2025 AG