APHC010110042013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 565/2013 Between: 1. SRI VENKATESWARA SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS, PRESIDENT VADINENI SANJEEVA RAO S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O D.NO.14-72-B, ADDANKI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. SRI SAI VENKATESWARA WELFARE SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS, PRESIDENT KODIMELA VENKATESWARLU S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 21-28, BHAVANI CENTRE, ADDANKI VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. SRI SRINIVASA WELFARE SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, PASUPULETI SRINIVASA RAO S/O SOMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 10-44, DR.GOPALARAO STREET ADDANKI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. SRI SAI BABA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, REP. BY CH., KOTESWARARAO S/OI GANGAIAH, AGED 57 YEARS R/O CHINAGANUGUPALEM, ADDANKI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. ADDANKI MUNICIPALITY REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER ADDANKI, 2 PRAKSAM DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, A.P. SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, ADDANKI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...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 issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the impugned notice dt. 28.12.2012 issued by the 15t respondent threatening to seize the plants of the petitioners though the petitioners are not doing any commercial business and supplying the purified water to the villagers at very nominal rate as being illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 683 OF 2013 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned Notice dated 28.12.2012 issued by the 1st respondent herein pending disposal of the main writ petition IA NO: 4 OF 2013(WPMP 3072 OF 2013 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 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K ARUNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SHANTHI NEELAM 2. SC FOR APCPDCL The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 565/2013 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: “to declare the impugned Notice dt. 28.12.2012 issued by the 1st respondent threatening to seize the plants of the Petitioners though the petitioners are not doing any commercial business and supplying the purified water to the villagers at very nominal rate as being illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper”. 2. It is stated that the Petitioner’s societies are registered with the Registrar Societies, Markapur. The Petitioners had identified that within the Addanki Gram Panchayat, Addanki Mandal, the underground water contains fluoride and it is not fit for human consumption. It was in that context, the water was being supplied to the members of the said villages at nominal prices. It is stated that a clarification vide Rc.No.C8/AFC/Z- III/2010, dated 07.05.2010 was issued prohibiting the sale of packaged drinking water for commercial purposes without BIS Certificate. It is further stated that the Rule 49 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955, prohibits sale of packaged drinking water and as the Petitioners are not involved in packing drinking water, the said Rule will not apply to the 4 Petitioner. Therefore, the action of the Respondents in issuing the impugned Notice cannot be sustained. 3. A Counter Affidavit was filed by the Respondent No.1, wherein it is stated that the Petitioners should obtain necessary permission from the concerned Department for running water plants, but the Petitioners are running the units without following the rules and regulations and without obtaining the necessary permissions from the concerned authorities. 4. Having heard both the counsel, in view of passage of time and with counsels expressing their inability to state the affairs as on date, the only way to dispose the Writ Petition with a direction that any further action against Petitioner shall be in accordance with law. 5. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J. Date: 08-07-2025 eha 5 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WP No. 565 of 2013 Dt.08-07-2025 eha U