APHC010339232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3524] SATURDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17359/2025 Between: 1. M/S. A. SAL VENKATESWARA RAO,, SY.NO.1, V.NO.55, VOORALOVA HILL, VOMMILIJAGANNADPURAM VILLAGE, MADUGULA MANDAL,ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR, A.SAI VENKATESWARA RAO. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VELAGAPUDI', SECRETARIAT BUILDING,GUNTUR DISTRICT., REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, D.NO. 33-26-14D/2, NEAR SUNRISE HOSPITAL, PUSHPA HOTEL CENTRE, CHALAMAVALARI STREET, KASTURIBAIPET, VIJAYAWADA-520 010. REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. THE JOINT CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, ZONAL OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2 5. THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF A.P., SRI ANJANEYA TOWERS, D.NO.7-104, B-BLOCK, 5TH AND 6TH FLOORS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA-521456. 6. THE DIVISIONAL MINES AND GEOLOGY OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. RESPONDENT NOS.5 AND 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER C.O.DT.17-09-2025 IN W.P.NO.17359 OF 2025. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Lr.No.7885/APPCB/ZO-VSPA/SP/CTO/2025 Dt.23.06.2025 to the extent of demand of CTO fee of Rs.12,76,993/- under G.O.Ms No.13 dt.26.02.2021, G.O.Ms.No.10 dt. 14.02.2023 and Non-considering of the petitioners Nil-Dispatch permits as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to issue CTO onpayment of fee as per G.O.Ms.No. 10 dt. 14.02.2023 only 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 may be pl;3ased to direct the Respondent N0.2&3 to issue CTO on payment of fee as per G.O.Ms. No. 10 dt.14.02.2023 only pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to grant leave and receive the reply affidavit in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 3 1. UTTARA LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FORESTS 2. YELISETTI SOMARAJU STANDING COUNSEL APPCB 3. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17359 OF 2025 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) Heard Sri K.Sai Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.B.Sravani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests appearing for the 1st respondent, Sri Burlu Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel for Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.Pollution Control Board/respondents 2 to 4, and learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for respondents 5 and 6. 2. The order impugned in the writ petition is dated 23.06.2025, passed by the A.P.Pollution Control Board. 3. The issue is the demand of the Consent fee for the non- operating period for renewal of Consent to Operate as also the demand giving retrospective effect to the G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 14.02.2023 4. The 1st respondent stated in the counter-affidavit inter alia that vide letters dated 31.07.2025 and 11.09.2025, the Andhra Pradesh 5 Pollution Control Board requested the Department of Mines & Geology, Government of Andhra Pradesh, to furnish the information pertaining to non-operational period mines in the State for examining the request for exemption/waiver of the CTE & CTO fees for the non-operational period of the mines, for taking necessary action in the matter and submitting that soon after receipt of the required information from APPCB, the Government could examine the issue duly considering the financial implications and take appropriate action in the matter. In view of the said stand, the Mines Department was directed to be impleaded in the writ petition as respondent Nos.5 and 6 and was also granted time to file the counter-affidavit explaining the position for the payment of the fee for CTO and/or CTE, for the non-operational period. 5. On 17.09.2025, we passed the following order: “On 03.09.2025, we passed the following order: “ On 14.07.2025, we passed the following order : “Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.S.Naveen, submits that the 3rd respondent has issued the impugned order, making demand of the balance consent fee of Rs.12,76,993/- for the non- operating period, for renewal of Consent To Operate. He submits that for the non-operating period, after the expiry of the validity period, the consent fee could not be asked for. He further submits that the said respondent is giving retrospective effect to G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 14.02.2023, which is impermissible. 6 2. Sri Yelisetti Soma Raju, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 to 4, prays for time to obtain instructions, specifically on the aforesaid points. 3.Post on 21.07.2025.” 2. After having granted time to the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4, and further time by way of last opportunity vide order dated 20.08.2025, the 4th respondent has filed its counter affidavit on 02.09.2025. 3. With reference to the issue noted in the order dated 14.07.2025, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) addressed letters, dated 27.07.2023 and 28.02.2025, to respondent No.1 – the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Environment, Forest, Science & Technology Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, seeking clarification regarding exemption/waiver of CTE/CTO fee claims in respect of certain categories of industrial establishments for the period of non-operation. However, no clarification has been received from respondent No.1 till date. It is further submitted that in the absence of such clarification/instructions from respondent No.1, the APPCB is not in a position to take any decision with regard to exemption for the non-operational period. He submits further that the said averments have been specifically set out in paragraph No.9 of the counter affidavit, and in support thereof, copies of the letters addressed to respondent No.1 have been annexed. 4. Sri Kata Sambasiva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests appears for respondent No.1. 5. Respondent No.1 shall file a counter affidavit within a period of two (02) weeks positively, failing which, respondent Nos.1 & 2 shall appear before this Court on the next date of hearing. 7 6. Post the matter on 17.09.2025.” 2. In the said order, we also reproduced the order dated 14.07.2025. 3. The impugned demand notice for renewal of the Consent to Operate for the petitioner, after payment of the balance consent fee also included the balance fee, which could not be so included in the submission of the petitioner’s counsel for the non-operating period. 4. Additionally, the contention of the petitioner’s counsel was that G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 14.02.2023 was being given retrospective effect, which is not permissible in law. 5. With respect to the demand for the non- operational period, the respondents 2 to 4 were directed to obtain instructions. In their counter, they inter alia, stated that they addressed letters to the 1st respondent but the instructions were awaited and consequently, no stand was taken on that aspect in their counter-affidavit. 6. The 1st respondent has also filed counter-affidavit and he is shifting the responsibility on the Mining Department, submitting that they had written letter to the Director of Mines and Geology Department on 31.07.2025 (at page Nos.93-94) followed by the letter dated 11.09.2025 (at page Nos.95-96) to clarify and to provide instructions with respect to the CTO & CTE fees for the non-operational period, but the reply has not been received. 7. Prima facie, we find that the respondents 2 to 4 shifted the responsibility on the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent is shifting the responsibility on the Mines Department with respect to the query made by us, in the orders referred to above for the alleged non-operational period. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the non-operational period was 8 from the years 2021-22 to 2024-25, and in support of the said contention, he has placed reliance in Ex.P5 (at page No.25 of the writ petition), which is the letter dated 30.04.2025 from the Divisional Mines and Geology Officer, Narsipatnam, Anakapalli District, however, the concerned authority, Mines Department, is not made as a party in the present writ petition. 9. We direct the Registry to implead 1) the Director of Mines & Geology, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of A.P, Sri Anjaneya Towes, D.No.7-104, B-Block, 5th & 6th Floors, Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada-521 456, 2) the Divisional Mines and Geology Officer, Narsipatnam, Anakapalli District, as the 5th respondent and 6th respondent respectively in the writ petition. 10. Issue notice to respondents 5 and 6. 11. The petitioner shall serve copy of this petition along with the copy of the order passed today, personally, to the said respondents within a period of one week, in addition to taking steps through Registered Post, upon which, inter alia, the said impleaded 5th and 6th respondents shall file counter-affidavit also explaining the position for the payment of the fee for CTO and/or CTE, for the non-operational period. 12. If the complete instructions on the aforesaid points are not provided and the counter-affidavit is not filed by the respondents 5 and 6, before the next date, the respondents 1, 2, 5 and 6 shall appear before this Court on the date fixed. 13. List on 25.09.2025.” 6. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the 6th respondent, submitting 9 inter alia, that the requested information, has been furnished along with the comprehensive proposal to the Government. A copy thereof has been annexed along with the counter-affidavit. 7. In view of the above, so far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to the CTO/CTE renewal fee for the non-operational period is concerned, the 1st respondent shall take appropriate decision on that aspect within a period of two months from the date copy of this order is placed before the 1st respondent. 8. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the A.P.Pollution Control Board has proceeded to demand the fee based on G.O.Ms.No.10 dated 14.02.2023 but giving it retrospective effect, which is contrary to the settled legal position in M/s.Sanjeev Granites v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others (W.P.No.14057 of 2023 dated 30.08.2023), wherein it has been held that the G.O.MS.No.10 shall apply only prospectively after the date of validity period of any subsisting C.T.O/C.T.E. 9. Learned Government Pleader for the 1st respondent submits that the judgment in W.P.No.14057 of 2023 (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 10 10. In W.P.No.14057 of 2023 (supra), this Court has held as under: “17. We are of the considered view that G.O.Ms.No.13 or/and G.O.Ms.No.10, cannot be given retrospective effect to the petitioner concern. The same shall apply only prospectively after the expiry of the validity period of the CTO, i.e., after 30.06.2023. 18. The expression "from the date of issue of this notification” in G.O.Ms.No.13 and the expression "shall come into force from the date of publication of this notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette" in G.O.Ms.No.10 refers the applicability of the G.O.Ms. Nos. 13 and 10 respectively, with respect to the fresh applications or the applications for renewal for CTO and CTE and in this way both the G.O.Ms.Nos. 13 and 10 are made to operate prospectively.” 11. The A.P.Pollution Control Board shall therefore reconsider the matter, a) after the decision is taken by the State as aforesaid on the aspect of fee for non-operational period, considering the same; and b) on the aspect of G.O.MS.No.10 dated 14.02.2023 as per the aforesaid judgment in W.P.No.14057 of 2023 (supra), taking into account its applicability in the facts of the petitioner’s case. 12. The A.P.Pollution Control Board shall take the decision within a period of one month after the decision is taken by the 1st 11 respondent-State, which has to take decision within the period as specified above for the 1st respondent-State in para 7 (supra). 13. The impugned order shall abide by the fresh order. 14. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date: 31.01.2026 Pab 12 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17359 OF 2025 DATE: 31.01.2026 Pab