THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN TAKEN UP W.P.NO.6562 of 2006 12-11-2009 BETWEEN; k.Appala Raju, Chairman Vidya Committee and three others ...Petitioners vs. The Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA) rep by its Chairman, Visakhapatnam and others ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN TAKEN UP W.P.NO.6562 of 2006 ORAL ORDER: (Per GR,J) This is a taken up writ petition pursuant to a letter dated 25.03.200 addressed by the Chairman and three members of the Vidya Committee Sri Santi Gurukula Patasala, Visakhapatnam (“the Committee”) t the Chief Justice of High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 28-03-2006. O registration as a writ petition, nine(9) respondents are arrayed and b subsequent orders of this Court dated 05-04-2007 in WPMP No.8009 o 2007 respondent Nos.10 and 11 are also impleaded, these respondent being owners of the site, where a Retail Petroleum Outlet is proposed t be established adjacent to Sri Santi Gurukula Patasala. By the order dated 04-04-2006 while calling for response from th official respondents, this Court directed the 8th respondent-th Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) not to continue with an construction activity on the site and further directed the District Collecto Visakhapatnam- 4th respondent to depute an officer to visit th site, prepare a status report and furnish the same to the Court. The Distric Collector submitted a report and the other respondents have also filed the counter-affidavits. The grievance of the Committee, as reflected in its representatio dated 25-03-2006, is that despite its numerous representations to th several Government Departments and functionaries against the proposa to establish a BPCL Petrol bunk, adjacent to Sri Santi Gurukula Patasal and Omkar Lions Deaf & Dumb Government Aided School, no action i being taken and No-objection Certificates (NOC) are being wantonl issued without regard to the safety of the occupants of the schools i question. In this representation it is asserted that Sy.No.51/1B of Chin Waltair village, where the Retail Petroleum Outlet is proposed, is within th C.R.Z limits and the 1989 VUDA Master Plan has not earmarked the are for commercial activity. We have perused the Committee’s representation date 25.03.2006, the accompanying photographs and the severa representations made by the Committee to the several authorities, as als the counter-affidavits filed by the Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam the 2nd respondent, Secretary, Municipal Administration Departmene Hyderabad- the 3rd respondent, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limite (BPCL)- the 8th respondent, the District Collector, Visakhapatnam- the 4t respondent; and the Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam-7t respondent. Insofar as the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) objection is concerned the National Institute of Oceanography has, in a letter dated 12-08-200 addressed to the Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam, stated that on the basi of the field survey undertaken by it for HTL/LTL demarcation on 24-07 2005 and 27.07.2005, it is noticed that the minimum distance of th proposed Petrol bunk in Sy.No.51/1B of China Waltair is 241 meters from the High Tide Line (HTL) and 364 meters from Low Tide Line (LTL). Th relevant C.R.Z demarcation map has been enclosed to this letter. On th basis of the above information furnished by the National Institute o Oceanography, the District Collector, Visakhapatnam issued a certificat dated 20-08-2005 according NOC under C.R.Z Regulations for installatio of a Retail Outlet of the 8th respondent in Sy.No.51/1B. The C.R. notification classifies coastal zones under three (3) categories fo regulating development activities in the coastal stretch within 500 meter of HTL on the landward side. Insofar as the C.R.Z.III is concerned, th area up to 200 meters from HTL is specified as a “No Development Zone while development is permitted between 200 to 500 meters. By notification dated 19-10-2002 issued by the Ministry of Environment an Forests, the initial notification dated 19-02-1991 was amended. To th extent relevant for the purpose of this writ petition, insofar as the CRZ.III i concerned, facilities for receipt and storage of petroleum products an liquefied natural gas as specified in Annexure-III appended to th notification and facilities for regasification of liquefied natural gas subjec to the conditions as mentioned in para.2(ii), facilities for generating powe by non-conventional energy sources, desalination plants, Radars an construction of airstrips and associated facilities in the islands o Lakshadweep and Andaman & Nicobar, are permitted uses. In the light o this amendment, it is the case of the official respondents that th establishment of a Retail Petroleum Outlet in Sy.No.51/1B of China Walta does not fall foul of the CRZ Regulations, as now amended. Th Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam has issued NOC on 16-12-2005 subject to certain conditions as to the payment of fee an submission of documents, which are not relevant for the purposes of thi writ petition. The Chief Medical Officer, Municipal Corporation o Visakhapatnam addressed a letter dated 22.11.2005 to the Commissione of Police, Visakhapatnam setting forth his “no objection” for grant o permission for establishing the Retail Petroleum Outlet subject to th condition that a strong masonry wall should be constructed between th proposed Petrol Bunk and the Yogashramam compound wall for publi safety and that the vehicles that are visit the retail out let shall not b allowed to be parked on the road margins. The Commissioner, Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation in hi counter-affidavit states that having received the NOC furnished by th BPCL, the Corporation examined the proposals with reference to th Master Plan and Zoning Regulations and identified the proposed site a falling within “Public and Semi Public” use Zone where petrol fillin stations can be permitted as per the Zoning Regulations. Consequently the Municipal Corporation issued “NOC” by the letter dated 16-12-200 addressed to the Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam. The counter-affidavit of the Commissioner of Police Visakhapatnam asserts that on the representation of the BPCL for “NOC the application was forwarded to the District Fire Officer, Visakhapatnam the Commissioner, Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, the Chie Medical Officer, Visakha Municipal Corporation, the Revenue Divisiona Officer, Visakhapatnam, Vice-Chairman, Visakhapatnam Urba Development Area (VUDA) and to the Law & Order and Traffic Polic Wings of the Visakhapatnam Police Commissionarate. All officers, excep the Vice-Chairman, VUDA issued “NOC”. The Vice Chairman, VUDA stated that the premises falls under the C.R.Z area. Subsequently, th BPCL was called upon to obtain “NOC” from the District Collector, whic the BPCL has procured, on the basis of the information furnished by th National Institute of Oceanography, Visakhapatnam. According to th Commissioner of Police, on receipt of all the above inspection reports an the certificate issued by the Collector, Visakhapatnam, “NOC” was issue on 03-01-2006 for installation of a Retail Petroleum Outlet subject t sixteen (16) conditions mentioned in the proceedings. It is further stated i this counter-affidavit that the distance between the main gate of Santh Ashram Patasala, and the proposed petrol bunk is 222 feet from North t South and the distance between the compound wall of Omkar Lions School for Deaf and Dumb and the compound wall of the petrol bunk i 102 feet; the distance between the petrol bunk in question and the mai road is 32 feet. “NOC” was issued, as there was a reasonable distanc between the premises in question and the adjoining school, concludes thi counter. On the basis of the record available in this case, the counter-affidavit referred to, considered together with the representations which led to th institution of this writ petition, this Court is satisfied that the establishmen of a Retail Petroleum Outlet in Sy.No.51/1B, China Waltair contravene neither the C.R.Z Regulations nor the Zoning Regulations and as per th certificates issued by the authorities presumably on satisfaction, th premises is also not injurious to the health and safety of the occupants o the adjoining schools. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The interim order dated 04 04-2006 stands dissolved. No order as to costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J __________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 12th NOVEMBER 2009. TSNR