THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 13229 of 2006 Between: Jagadamba Enterprises rep. by its Proprietor, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. … Petitioner And: The Comissioner, APIIC-IALA, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad. … Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 13229 of 2006 ORAL ORDER : The writ petition is directed against a notice dated 16.6.2006 issued by the respondent, which reads as under: “ During the inspection carried out in phase-I, IDA, Jeedimetla, by the undersigned on 15th of June 2006, it is noticed that you are carrying out trading of Furnace Oil which is highly objectionable since this Trading is dangerous not only to the established place but also to the neighbouring Units as you have installed Tanks in and over the Earth. You are hereby requested to remove all the tanks located underground and on the ground from the Industrial Premises within 24 Hours, failing which action will be initiated as per the Rules of A.P. Municipalities Act 1965. Further, you are letting out water on the Road which causes inconvenience to the General Public and also damaging the Roads and Premises. Hence you are requested to arrest the water letting on the road.” The petitioner is firstly requested to remove all the underground tanks that store Furnace Oil on the ground that such storage and its user is inimical to public interest as also hazardous to neighbouring units. The petitioner is intimated that if he does not remove the underground tanks with Furnace Oil, action would be initiated under the AP Municipalities Act. The petitioner is secondly called upon to forthwith arrest the flow of water onto the road as this causes inconvenience to the road users and damages the road. Mr. Durga Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned notice is arbitrary and illegal as no opportunity and advance notice has been given to the petitioner before proposing the action directed in the notice. This contention is stated to be rejected. The impugned instrument is itself a show cause notice which calls upon the petitioner to remove the alleged nuisance failing which statutory action would be initiated. The petitioner is also called upon to stop forthwith the letting out of water from his premises on to the road. As the letting of the water on to the road causes imminent public injury no elaborate charade of natural justice is warranted. If it is the case of the petitioner that no water is coming from his premises on to the road, he may merely intimate that fact to the respondent. If on the other hand water is flowing out from his premises on to the road, the petitioner is obligated, on all established principles of law as well as requirement of responsible behaviour in a civil society, to abate the nuisance. He has no escape from this obligation nor can he insist on an endless ritual of natural justice while he perpetuates the nuisance to the peril of the community. With respect to underground tanks, as and when the respondent initiates action under the Act as proposed in the show cause notice, it would then be appropriate for the petitioner to consider whether such action is inconformity with his rights and if it is not, to take appropriate remedial measures thereagainst. The petitioner’s apprehensions are just that at that moment and his complaint is moot. No merits in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Dt: 27.07.2006 ------------------------ Pvsn Justice G.Raghuram