IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 12772 of 2008 Between: P. Suryanarayana Raju S/o. Varahala Raju Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, A.P. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Panchayat Secretary, Sagaram Gram Panchayat Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Sarpanch, Sagaram Gram Panchayat Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3 Sagaram Gram Panchayat Rep. by Panchayat Secretary, Madugula Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the Notice (Order) signed by the 1st and 2nd respondents containing the dt. 9-3-2008 and 12-5-2008 cancelling the permission granted by the 3rd respondent herein vide Resolution NO. 75 dt. 7-10-2007 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and grant such other relief or reliefs as this Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.NOUSHAD ALI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.PRABHAKARA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 12772 of 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner herein is running a cement brick unit in Madgula village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the respondents 1 and 2 dated 12.5.2005 whereunder the permission granted by the Grampanchayat in favour of the petitioner to run the cement brick unit was cancelled and the petitioner was called upon to stop the manufacturing process. It is primarily contended by the petitioner that the impugned order which was issued without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to explain the allegations that the unit is causing air pollution and sound pollution effecting public health of the neighbouring residents is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Sri M.Prabhakar Rao, who accepted notice for the respondents, could not dispute the fact that no prior notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon to submit his explanation against the impugned action. As a matter of fact, the impugned order itself shows that the petitioner’s unit was directed to be closed on a complaint received from certain individuals without conducting any enquiry into the correctness of the said allegations. In the circumstances, the impugned order being, ex facie illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the same is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the respondents to take appropriate action, if necessary, following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 24-06-2008 KLP