IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.28989 of 2008 Between: 1. Kolanu Devender Reddy, S/o. Yadi Reddy, R/o. Brahmanapalle Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District. 2. Surakanti Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Bal Reddy, R/o. Brahmanapalle Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District. 3. Surakanti Janga Reddy, S/o. Bagi Reddy, R/o. Brahmanapalle Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District. ...Petitioners And 1. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner & Special Officer, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 2. The A.P. Pollution Control Board, Paryavarana Bhavan, A-3 Industrial Estate, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad, Represented by its Member Secretary, 3. R.D.F. Power Projects Limited, Flat No. 401, Galada Towers, Adjacent Lane to Panthaloons, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Represented by its Executive Director. ...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 or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 in granting authorization/permission and Consent Order for Establishment (CFE) in favour of the 3rd respondent for establishing 11 MV Power Project based on Municipal Solid Waste in the land situated in SY.Nos.31 and 35 of Chinaravulapalli Village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District are bad illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 not to grant authorization/ permission and Consent Order for Operation (CFO) in favour of the 3rd respondent. Counsel for the petitioner : Sri C. Damodar Reddy Counsel for respondent No.1 : Sri R. Ramachandra Reddy, Standing Counsel for GHMC. Counsel for respondent No.3 : Smt. Jyoti Eswar Gogineni The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, C.J.) Being aggrieved by the consent order for establishment, dated 1st March, 2006 issued by respondent No.2, this petition has been filed. By virtue of the impugned order, permission has been granted to respondent No.3 to set up a power plant. In our opinion, the better course for the petitioners would be to approach the appellate authority under the provisions of Section 31 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. As an equally efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioners, we do not entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Needless to say that we have not examined the matter on merits and it would be open to the petitioners to approach the appellate authority so that the matter can be examined by the appellate authority. The petition is rejected with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 21st January, 2009 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. To 1. The Commissioner & Special Officer, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 2. The Member Secretary, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Paryavarana Bhavan, A-3 Industrial Estate, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad. 3. Two CD copies. ARS