IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No. 27053 of 2008 Between: K. Mrutumjaya Rao S/o.Late Satyanarayana Rao, Aged about 64 years, R/o.Door No.10-35-143/1, VUDA Layout, Bank Colony, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. ... PETITIONER AND 1) Union of India rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2) A.P. Pollution Control Board rep. By its Member Secretary, IDA, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad. 3) Govt. of Andhra Pradesh rep. By its Principal Secretary to Government, Environment, Forest & Science Technology Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. 4) The Collector & District Magistrate, Srikakulam District. 5) The Assistant Director, Fisheries Department, Srikakulam District. 6) Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, rep. By its Managing Director, 5th & 6th Floors, Parishrama Bhavanam, Basheerbagh, Fatehmaidan Road, Hyderabad – 500 029. 7) M/s.East Coast Energy Pvt. Ltd., 7-1-23/2, B Block, 5th Floor, Roxana Towers, Green Land, Begumpet, Hyderabad – 500 016, rep. By its Managing 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not rejecting the application submitted by R-7 for setting up of 2640 MW Thermal Power Plant near Kakarlapalli Village, Santabommali Mandal as it is violation of SO 1533 dated 14/9/2006 issued by R-1 and inaction on the part of R-1 to 6 in stopping the works taken up by R-7 in Santabommali Mandal, Srikakulam District without clearance from the R-1 as illegal, unconstitutional and consequently direct the R-1 to reject application submitted by R-1 for setting up of Thermal Power Plant and prosecute R-7 for taking up works under the provisions of Environment Protection Act and restore the pristine glory of this area and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. K.S. MURTHY Counsel for Respondent No.1: MR. A. RAJASEKHAR REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.2: MR.Y. SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for Respondent No.3: G.P. FOR ENVIRONMENT Counsel for Respondent No.4: G.P. FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.5: G.P. FOR FISHERIES Counsel for Respondent No.6: MR. K.V. SIMHADRI Counsel for Respondent No.7: SHRI D. PRAKASH REDDY, SENIOR ADVOCATE The Court made the following: O R D E R: (Per Shri Anil R. Dave, Chief Justice) 1. This is a public interest litigation wherein it has been submitted that respondent No.7 is setting up a Thermal Power Plant near Kakarlapalli Village, Santabommali Mandal in Srikakulam District without getting any clearances from respondent No.1 as well as respondent No.2. It has been, therefore, prayed in the petition that respondent No.7 should be restrained from doing any work at the place in question so as to see that the aquatic and migratory birds, which are found near the place, are not affected. 2. Learned Senior Advocate Shri D. Prakash Reddy, who has instructions to appear for respondent No.7, has submitted that till today, no permission has been obtained by respondent No.7 from respondent No.1 and, therefore, his client is not doing any work for the purpose of establishment of Thermal Power Plant at the place in question. Shri Prakash Reddy has also submitted that respondent No.7 shall not do any work till necessary clearances are obtained from respondent No.1 as well as respondent No.2. 3. In view of the above statement made by learned Senior Advocate Shri D. Prakash Reddy on behalf of respondent No.7, in our opinion, the grievance ventilated in the petition would not survive, as no construction is to be put up at this stage without getting necessary clearance from respondent Nos.1 and 2 and, therefore, no harm is likely to be caused to the environment or to the aquatic or migratory birds. 4. The petition stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ December 12, 2008 R. SUBHASH REDDY, J svs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}