Disposed

P. Chennaiah v. the District Magistrate Masapet

NGT2 Sept 2024IA No. 97/2024 in Original Application No. 121/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court, in an NGT application regarding land and HPCL, observed prima facie that the land is agricultural. Suo motu, two additional respondents were impleaded, notice issued, and reports requested from Revenue Authorities and APPCB regarding land records and pollution compliance.

What did the court decide?

Impleaded two additional respondents and issued notices; directed Revenue and Pollution Board to file reports.

P. Chennaiah vs the District Magistrate Masapet — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.5:

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI

¶3

(Through Video Conference)

¶4

Original Application No. 121 of 2023 (SZ) & I.A. No.97 of 2024 (SZ)

¶5

IN THE MATTER OF:

¶6

P. Chennaiah
Andhra Pradesh
...Applicant(s)
Versus
The Sub Collector
Office of Sub Collector
Annamaiyya District
Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 02.09.2024.
CORAM :

¶7

HON’BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

¶8

HON’BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER

¶9

For Applicant(s): None. For Respondent(s): Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1 to R3. Mr. S. Saravanan for R4. M/s. Y. Prakash, R. Vinoth Kumar, R. Sidharth & N. Sanjeev Kumar for R5/I.A.

¶10

Page 1 of 3

¶11

ORDER

¶12

1. Today, there is no representation for the applicant.

¶13

2. The advance hearing application [I.A. No.97 of 2024 (SZ)] is closed.

¶14

3. Mr. Kamuluri Babasaheb S/o. Khadar Sahab, residing at 3-146-14-5 C-3, Chowdeswari Nagar, Neerugattuvari Palli, Madanapall, Annamaya District, Andhra Pradesh is Suo Motu impleaded as additional Respondent No.6 to this proceeding, as he is a dealer of the 4^th Respondent (M/s. HPCL). Similarly, as the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) is also a necessary party to this proceeding, we Suo Motu implead them as additional Respondent No.7 to this proceeding.

¶15

4. Let notice be issued to the newly added Respondents No.6 and 7 through the Tribunal as well as privately.

¶16

5. The report of the Revenue Divisional Officer has been filed, from which, prima facie the land in question appears to be the agricultural land.

¶17

6. Let the Revenue Authorities furnish a copy of the extract of the ‘A’ Register from the year 1946 till the date of the first mutation.

¶18

7. The APPCB is also directed to file a report after inspecting the property to verify whether the CPCB Guidelines

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

are strictly followed. Let APPCB also ascertain the nature of the land in question from the revenue records.

¶21

8. Post the matter on 12.09.2024 .

¶22

Sd/Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM

¶23

Sd/Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM

¶24

O.A. No.121/2023 (SZ) I.A. No.97/2024 (SZ) 02^nd September, 2024. Mn.

¶25

Page 3 of 3

P. Chennaiah v. the District Magistrate Masapet

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Chennaiah v. the District Magistrate Masapet

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravinsingh Arjun Shedgaonkar vs the Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Seiaa)

Mr John Fernandes vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Rajbir Malik vs State of Haryana

Sabra Leather Finishers vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Behru Lal Regar vs State of Rajasthan

Amit Upadhayay vs State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Uttar Pradesh

Prem Aggarwal vs

News Item Titled "Feeling Anxious? Toxic Air Could Be to Blame" Appearing in Times of India Dated 10.10.2023 vs

K Srinivasulu vs the Chief Secretary State of Ap

Pisati Indira Reddy vs Union of India

R N Palanichamy vs State of Tamilnadu