IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4173 of 2008 Between: 1. Dhulipalla Rama Rao, S/o. Venkaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 2. Devineni Kasiyya, S/o. Veeraiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 3. Upputuri Nagendram, W/o. Brahmmaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 4. Namburi Ramanujamma, W/o. Anajaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 5. Thupuri Venkaiah, S/o. Pedda Raghavulu, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 6. Namburi Seshaiah, W/o. China Gopaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 7. Namburi Ramaiah, S/o. China Gopaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 8.Thupuri Kotaiah, S/o. Pedda Raghavulu, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 9. Devineni Thulasamma, W/o.Brahmaiah, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 10.Nagabothu Srinivasa Rao, S/o. China Mastan, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 11.Thupuri Sambaiah, S/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 12.Thupuri China Anjaiah, S/o. China Raghavulu, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 13. Thupuri Pedda Anjaiah, S/o. Pedda Raghavulu, R/o. Makkenavaripalem Village, Santhanoothalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. .....Petitioners And 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The A.P. Pollution Control Board, represented by its Member Secretary, Hyderabad. 3. The District Collector, Prakasam District Ongole. 4. The Tahasildar, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 5. Ramaswamy Stone Crusher Ramanjaneyapuram, Muktheswaram Village, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 6. Venkateswara Stone Crusher, Ramanjaneyapuram, Muktheswaram Village, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 7. Venkataramana Stone Crusher, Ramanjaneyapuram, Muktheswaram Village, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 8. Bangaraiah & Santhamma Stone Crusher, Ramanjaneyapuram, Muktheswaram Village, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 9. Shankara Reddy Stone Crusher, Ramanjaneyapuram, Muktheswaram Village, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam 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 an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in not taking any action against the respondents 5 to 9 and not taking any steps to prevent the pollution being created by respondents 5 to 9 in spite of written representation by the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take action against respondents 5 to 9 for prevention of pollution. Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Sreenivasa Rao Velivela Counsel for respondent No.1 : Government Pleader for Forests Counsel for respondent No.2 : Sri Y. Srinivasa Murthy Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 : Government Pleader for Revenue Counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 9 : Sri Y. Balaji The Court made the following: ORDER: (per Anil R. Dave, C.J.) This is a public interest litigation, wherein it has been alleged that respondent Nos.5 to 9 are running their industries and thereby polluting the atmosphere. The petitioners had drawn the attention of respondent Nos.1 to 4 to the aforesaid fact, but as no action has been taken in pursuance of the complaint made by them, they filed this writ petition. In pursuance of the notice issued by this Court, Sri Y. Balaji, learned Advocate has appeared for respondent Nos.5 to 9 and he has submitted that during the pendency of this petition, respondent No.2 Board has directed closure of the industries run by respondent Nos.5 to 9 and, therefore, at present, respondent Nos.5 to 9 are not running their industries. In view of the above fact, the grievance ventilated in the petition does not survive. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 21st April, 2008 R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. ….REGISTRAR 1. The Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology, Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Member Secretary, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Hyderabad. 3. The District Collector, Prakasam District Ongole. 4. The Tahasildar, Ballikuruva Mandal, Prakasam District. 5. Two copies to the Government Pleader for Forests, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 6. Two copies to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 7. Two C.D. copies. ARS