Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Suragana Radhika, vs Veeramallu Suryanarayana on 9 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT. WEDENSDAY, THE NINTH DAY GF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWE sPRESENT: THE HONQURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASERHAR § LA. No, 1 of 2022 iN CMA, Na, 343 of 2022 Between: suragana Radivka, W/o. Nagendra Kummer, Aged Roout 50 years, Femals, Hindu Nousewife, Ria, B.No.Td-S-TO4/18, Bharat Nagar Colony, Near St. Reta Heh School, $.P. Nagar, Hyderabad 500 O18, Rangareddy District, Telangana. ava Appellant/Patitionerss™ J.Dr. AND VYeeramally Suryanarayana, idied on 24.02.2014. Originally he was Tst defendant in sult and he fs added as proforma respondent only}. Yeeramally Subba Rao, $/a. Suryanaray: Aged about 67 years, Mais, Hindu, Cultivation, Rie, Guravayyapalem, Kallciindy Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. ¥eermallu Devendra Prasad @ Devudu, S/ca. saryanay 'ayana, Aged about 5< years, Male, Hindu, Cultivation, Rfo. Near Water Tank, Mogailu, Palakodery Mandal, West Gadavari [INstri 'ct, Andhra Pre adesh. fd ted Respondents 1 to 3/Respondents/U. Ors. vi de, Chidiborma Prabhavathi, Wic. Veera Raghava Ran, Aged 5/ years, Female, Mindu, Housewife, Ryo. Near Water Tank, Mogallu, Palake nder u Maral, West Godavari District, Arvihra Pradesh mh 4* Respondents (4° Respandent/D. Hr. Petition under Section 151 CFC praying that in the circumstances stated In the affidavit fled in suppart of the oslifion, the High Court may be pleased to stay ' further proceedings in E.R. No.8 of 2017 in Q.8. No.G5 of 2072 an the fle of fhe HW Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhimavaram, Including delivery of the or aperty to the 4th respondent/D.Hr., Pending disposal of CMA No. 371 of 2022 on the file of the Hieh Court. FRe petition caming on far hearing Upon per using the Petition ane the affidavit fled in support thereot and the order of the High Court dated 27-09-2022 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A. Racha Krishna, Advacate for the Petitioner / Appellant and. of Sr) BLN. Murthy, for respondent No.4, the Caurt made the following "s Cond g.. ORDER:
"Stay granted earlier is extended by four more weeks. Post on 14.11.2022."
Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ur SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To
1.The Il! Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District.
2.One CC to SRI. A RADHAKRISHNA Advocate [OPUC]
3.One CC to Sri P.N. Murthy, Advocate[OPUC] 4,One spare copy TKK MIGH COURT FRE DAYTER » 09-94-2022 ORDER LANad of 2022 iN f&MAa No. 341 of F023 EXTENDING THE INTEIRM ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT! WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO TROUSAND AND TWENTY TWO :PRESENT:
THE HONQURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V SRINIVAS WANoas. 1& 2 OF 20282 iN WP NO: 26258 OF 2022 Between:
MAR Paper Chemicals Pri vale Linged, Located af Sy. Nos. 4 ' 18 & 48 (Parl, Gunpam Vilage, Pusar natiregs Mandal, Vi igianagaram District, Ariihra Pradesh S35 204 2<. And Kumar Parasrarmpuria, Oce Dh rector-Plant Gnerations, Gumpam Village, Pusapatirega Mandal, Vizianagaram District 555204. oe Petitioners in both las ~ AND i. The Stete of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by iis Princpal Secretary to Goverment, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology Department, Andhra Pradesh Secretarial, Velagapudi, Guntur District 822238 &. Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control 'Board, 2. we. 33-25- 1a, Die, Near Sunrise Hospital, Pushpa Hotel Centre, Chalamavari Street, Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada 520 G16, AP Aristry of Envi ronment j ores at nd Glrnate Change, Gevernment of Inca, 2nd Finer, Agni Block, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh Road, New Oath: F370 VIR, ope Raspandents iA No. 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 164 of Pe C praya ng thalin the circumstances siated in fhe affidavit fled in support of the petition. ihe High wee wi may be pleased to pannit Pattioner Not to manufacture of fs oraduct ASA in the Unit fac ated d in Gumpan, Vizianagarar until such trne the final CROACTO is 5 ota nied by Respondent No. 2 pending disposal oF WP No. SGES8 of 2022, on the fle of the High Court.
iA No. ¢ OF 2022 es Pettion under Section 184 GPC" praying thal in the crournstances slated in the affidavit fled in sugpert of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to in aiternate to prayer clause (8) above, to grant stay and effect an the impugned Notice dated August 27, 2022 and impugned Candition imposed al para 18ivjof the Tarms of Reference dated August 418, 8 F022 and restrain Respondent Nos.<, 3 andar trey sonal authantes from taking any anion pursuant to the impugned Nofice dated Auqual 27, 2022 and further issuing any adverse orders against the Petitioner for the want of EC andior CFOYCTO to man waclure any product in the Unit located in Gumpam, Vignagaran, pending dispose of WP No G6858 of 2022. an the fle of the Nigh Court.
The petitions coming on for he saris em upon perusing the Petitions and the ance NS f fed in support thereof anc upon hearing the arguments of Si CV. Mohan coy, learned Seniar Counsel appearing for Sri Venkat Chala, Advonate for the ett loners (in both §4 Peliiens) and of GP for Environment for the Respondent Nos.7 & 3 dn bath iA Petitions) and Sri AA Surendra Raddy, Standing Counsel! for Respondent No.2 (in both 1A Petitions) the court made following, : ORDER: oe "Aeard Sri C.¥. Mohan Reddy, leaned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Vankat Challis, learned counsel! for the pat oners, and Sri V, Surendra Reddy, igarned standing counsel appegring for the 2° * respondent.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that the 2°° respondent has given Consent for Establishment of the . 4° petitioner vide proceedings dated 24.08. 20174 and Consent for Qneration [CFO] of the products ws., AKD Wax Emulsion, Akeny! Suecinic Anhydride (ASA), Starch Based oreducte and Nogin Based Products vide proceedings dated 28.02.2098, valid for a period ending with O1.01.203. Before expiry of the said period, the 1" petitiener submitted application te the 3° respondent for renewal of CFO. Instead of granting renewal, the 2" respendent by letter dated 22.12.2020, insofar as the manufachue of ASA is concerned, asked the 1° petitioner to either obtain Environmental Clearance {EC} or sank a clarification on non-applicabliity of EC for the sald product from ihe State Environmental impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), The 2° petitioner, on behalf of the 1 petitioner, sought slarvication from SEIAA and Expert Appraisal Cammittes [EAC] of the 3° respondent - Ninietry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Sovernnant of india, Thereafter, several deliberations took place between the petitioners, SELAA and EAC. As per the Minutes of the EAC, dated 25.07.2022, the EAC prima facie was of the view that the manufacture of ASA by the 7 petitioner may not require EC. The 3° respondent, by letter dated 18.08.2022, addressed to the 1 patiiener issued Terme of Reference wherein though & was inter alia observed that the EAC recommends that APPCB may issue CTO far the production of ASA for the earlier granted capacity of 200 TPAM/2400 TPA since the PP is in the prosess of obtaining EC and alsa in view of the above observations of EAC with regard fo the pollution load, environmental impacts and applicability of EC for the manufacture of ASA, contrary to the said eiservation, al para 18iv) of the terms of reference, directed that the Siete Government/SPC8 to take action against the PP under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,.and further no consent to operate to be issued till the project is granted EC for the product which require EC.
However, the 2" respondent by notice dated 27.08.2022, directed the 1° petitioner not to manufacture ASA without valid CFO of the Board. Even in the Minutes of the EAC, dated 13.10.2022, also, the EAC recommended that even though the ASA is a synthetic organic Chemical, but not listed specifically like LABSA, considering its potential environmental impact, it should not attract the provisions of EIA Notification, 2006 (as amended) and hence, may be exempted from the requirement of EC. _ Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the 1° petitioner has been manufacturing ASA since 2016. In view of the recommendations of the EAC, referred above, he requested to direct the authorities to permit the 1* petitioner to manufacture ASA pending final decision of the authorities with regard to the requirement of EC. Learned standing counsel appearing for the 2"? respondent submits that the 2" respondent is the implementing authority only and that the SEIAA is the competent authority. .
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the learned Senior Counsel and on perusal of the material record, we are prima facie satisfied that the petitioners have shown sufficient cause for grant of interim order. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to not to interfere with the manufacture of ASA by the 1° petitioner, for a period of eight (08) weeks." . Sd/- M. SURYANADHA REDDY Po DEPUTY REGISTRAR {TRUE COPY// es re SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The Principal Secretary to Goverriment, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District-522238
2. Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control!Board, D.No. 33-26-14, 0/2, Near Sunrise . Hospital, Pushpa Hotel Centre, Chalamavari Street, Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada 520 010, AP .
ONOoh Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Agni Block, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi 110 003.(1 to 3 By RPAD) oo One CC to Sri. Venkat Challa, Advocate {OPUC] One CC to Sri V.Surendra Reddy, Standing Counsel [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Environment, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Two spare copies. en ear Pears HIGH COURT MGR & SVJ DATED OS S0e2 QRDER POST INMEDIATELY AFTER SANKRANTHI VACATION, 2023 f& Nos. & € of 2088 iN WP No. 36258 af 202¢ INTERIM CNREC TION