Petitioners sought closure orders against a company allegedly causing environmental and agricultural land damage. On joint consensus of parties, the court disposed of the writ petition in terms of its order in W.P.No.2951 of 2005 dated 10.09.2024, applying those directions mutatis mutandis, without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
,*'
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
134461
THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY FIVE
PRESENT
rHEHONOURABLE THE ACTTNG CHTEF JUSTTCE SUJOY pAUL AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION NO: 3079 2 0F 2023
Between:
...PETIT|ONERS AND
-,.RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the respondents in not issuing crosure orders to the sundar rspat Lrmited despite causing irreparabre ross to the environment and more particurarry to the petitioners agricurturar rand as ifiegar,
,-
.,ll
arbitrary,in violatiort cl ,Article 21 under the Constitution of lndia' and in violation of principles of natural.l .tsticeand Consequently direct the responderrtauthorityto forthwith issueclosurr: orders to the Sundarlspat Limited-
IA NO: 10F 2023
Petitionund.3r[]l]Ctionl5.lCPCprayingthatinthecircumsta|lceSStatedin the affidavitfiredin sucport of the petition, the High court may be preasedto direct the respondqntauthorily to considerthe representation submittedb1 the petitioner dt.13t}gl2}23,pending outcome of the main Writ Petition'
lA NO:2oF 2023
Petitionunder]3ectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavitfiled irrsL- pport of the petition,the HighCourt ma-v be plr:ased to direct the respondentauthorrtyto not carry any production activitiesand rnaintainstatus quo, pending outcoTr()of the mainwrit petition'
Counsel forthe Petitioners:SRIABDUL AZAMKHAN FOR SRIMOHD BASEER RIYAZ Counsel forthe Respondent Nos'1,5 & 6: M/s' T'SWETCHA' AGPFOR REVENUE C;r;"I for theRespondent No'2:SRIA'ANANTHASEN REDDY' GP FOR
INDUSTRIES
Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: GP FOR AGRICULTURE C.r"."f forthe Respondent No'4:SRI G'VEERASWAMY'GP FOff ENVIRONMENT
Counsel forthe Respondent No'7:SRIZEESHANADNAN MAHM()OD'SC FOR TSPCB
Counsel forthe Respondent No'8:SRIVIJAY ASHRIT
The Court madethe following:ORDER
,' t.
I I
i I I I I
I I
.tl
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION No.3O792 of2o23
ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog paut)
Sri Abdul Azam Khan, learned counsel appearing for Sri Mohd. Baseer Riyaz, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms.T.Swetcha, learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.i, 5 and 6; Sri A.Ananthasen Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Industries for respondent No.2; sri G.veeraswamy, rearned Government pleader for Environment Department, for respondent No.4 ald Sri Zeeshart Adnan Mahmood, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State pollution Control Board, for respondent No.7.
\ t
J In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed 1n
\
f
2
,i
a :-
W.P.No.2951.rfi)()os,dated10.09,2024.Thedirer:tionsContained in the aforeszriilorder shaTlmutatis mutandis applvto thiscase
with full force.|io order as to costs'
Miscellarreouspetitions pending, if any, shallstan.1ciosed.
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- K. AMMAJI ASSf'l4NT NREGISTRAR
SECTION OFFICER
To
tt' ;r
PSK. GJP
I
$
HIGHCOURT
DATED:2010212025
t-'l
ORDER
WP.No.30792of 2023
,3fA, c
tI <br>'1
10 ArR 2025
C
* {
i
"t Soa 'crtE o
:
DISPOSINGOF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS
ft /z { /g
€'
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondents should be directed to issue closure orders to Sundar Ispat Limited for environmental damage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ganda Arundathi
Karthik Reddy Gunda
The State of Telangana (Revenue Department)
The State of Telangana (Industries Department)
The State of Telangana (Department of Agriculture)
M/s. The Sundar Ispat Limited
Sujoy Paul
Renuka Yara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
