THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.Nos. 18474 and 25932 of 2008. COMMON ORDER: (Per Goda Raghuram, J) Heard Sri.Peda Babu, Sri.M.S.N. Prasad Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government for Industries and Commerce, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, the Standing Counsel for the A.P. Pollution Control Board and Sri.B.Adinarayana Rao, learned Counsel for the un-official respondents. Substantively the grievance in these writ petitions is that the official respondents are not taking any action for the removal of the unauthorised brick kilns established by the un-official respondents in and around the specified villages in Kolluru Mandal, Guntur District and seek a direction to the official respondents not to allow or permit brick kilns to be established within a radius of two kilometres from human habitation and agricultural lands in the specified villages. According to the petitioners, on account of quantum growth of brick kilns there is a widespread pollution and erosion of soil pejoratively affecting agricultural operations, soil fertility as well as causing huge pollution, which adversely impacts the health and well being of the habitants in the area. On 20.12.2009, the official respondents were directed to file a counter affidavit setting out the general governance standards and statutory obligations of the official respondents in respect of the grievance set out in the writ petitions. In W.P.No. 18474 of 2008, the 4th respondent on behalf of the Department of Mines and Geology filed a counter affidavit stating that since clay is a minor mineral falling within the regulatory contours of the State qua the provisions of Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 and Rule 4 of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1966 enumerates Regulations in respect use of clay for manufacture of bricks; and under item No. 16 of Schedule I under Rule 10 of 1966 Rules, the only provision operative is for collection of annual seiniorage fee of Rs. 3,500/-, registration certificates are being issued on payment of the above amount by each brick kiln. In the absence of any other regulatory power available, the Department of Mines and Geology can exercise no power in this area. On behalf of the A.P. Pollution Control Board and respondents 2 and 3, the Environmental Engineer of the Board has filed a counter affidavit dt. 16.3.2011 wherein it is stated that pursuant to the directions of this Court dt. 30.7.2008, the Environmental Science and Technology Department issued guidelines in G.O.Ms.No. 80 dt. 22.4.2010 with regard to the establishment of brick kilns in the State. It is further stated that the Pollution Control Board is also taking steps to intimate the revenue officials to inform brick kiln operators to take necessary measures to keep a reasonable distance from agricultural lands so that there would not be any erosion of soil and that necessary precautionary measures are directed to be taken by the officials to ensure that brick kiln (Batti) is situate in the midst of the land of the concerned operator rather than at the edge of his land. The guidelines issued in G.O.Mss.No. 80 enjoin inter alia that the edge of the brick clamp (batti) shall be at a radial distance of— a) 1 KM from any human habitation, hospitals, educational and any other institutions; b) 100 m as far as practicable, but in no case less than 50 mtrs from the neighbors’ agricultural/horticulture lands. The Brick Clamp shall have the accessibility without disturbing the surrounding crops; c) 100 mtrs from flood banks of river; d) 200 mtrs from the National Highways/State Highwas/Expressways/Ring Roads; and e) 25 m from the village roads. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would contend that though the issuance of guidelines under G.O.Ms.No. 80 mitigates to some extent the pollution occasioned by the brick kilns, the guidelines do not meet the grievance of the farmers and owners of agricultural lands, particularly when a lot of soil is dug up by the brick kilns in their own lands. In the absence of any legislative measure or executive orders or regulations in this area; and the balancing between permitting or prohibiting brick kilns on the one hand and sustenance and nurturing of the agricultural operations on the other is an essential policy issue, we are not inclined to issue any further directions. If the owners of the lands adjacent to brick kilns suffer any damage on account of the brick kilns apart from pollution, they are always at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies by seeking injunctive or compensatory reliefs before civil court of competent jurisdiction. On the aforesaid analysis, no further orders are required to be passed in these writ petitions. The writ petitions are disposed of recording the issuance of guidelines by the State in G.O.Ms.No. 80 Environment, Forests, Science & Technology (Environment) Department dt. 22.4.2010 There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J ​__________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 01.04.2011. KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.Nos. 18474 and 25932 of 2008. Dt. 01.04.2011