Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI NATH TILHARI, MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
Vennapusa Siva Sankar Reddy S/o V. Pulla Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP Rep. By its chief secretary, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.
Heard Sri K. S. Murthy, learned senior Advocate, assisted by Sri K. Guru Raja, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Yelisetty Soma Raju, learned standing counsel for the respondents 3 & 4 and Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Vimal Varma Vasireddy, learned counsel for the 11th respondent. Ms. K. Vijayeswari, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appears for the respondents 1, 2, 6, 7 & 8.
2. Learned counsels for the respondents advanced the arguments. They did not pray for counter affidavit.
3. The 11th respondent-M/s.Dalmia Cements (Bharath) Limited, (Cement Division), Y. S. R. Kadapa District, had constructed and established its Cement Factory in 2006. It applied for expansion of cement production unit from 4.6 M.T.P.A to 12.6 M.T.P.A and mining unit from 3.819 to 11.32 M.T.P.A. and for that purpose for environmental clearance.
4. The Environment Engineer of A. P. Pollution Control Board, respondents 3 and 4 published Public Hearing Notification dated 21.02.2025 (in short ‘the Notification, dated 21.02.2025’), on the proposal of M/s.Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited for expansion of Nawabpeta Talamanchipatna
The court affirmed the right of affected parties to participate in public consultations regarding environmental clearances, emphasizing the need for regulatory authorities to consider all material co....
The court held that the petitioner has the right to challenge relocation recommendations based on potential harm to its interests, reinforcing the need for a thorough review process under environment....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an amended notification can apply retrospectively and not infringe the procedural law of holding public hearing.
Requirements of prior Environmental Clearance - It is a trite law that a writ cannot be issued on ground of violation of principles of natural justice if only one conclusion is possible in a given si....
The court affirmed that any expansion exceeding specified limits under the EIA Notification requires prior Environmental Clearance, emphasizing rigorous compliance with environmental assessment proce....
Court held that amendments to the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, which shifted authority and reduced public consultation, were unconstitutional and violated environmental protections u....
The court ruled that amendments extending environmental clearance validity violate statutory and constitutional mandates, undermining effective environmental governance and public interest.
The notification extending environmental clearance validity without proper consultation is unconstitutional, undermining environmental protection statutes.
The court ruled the retrospective effect of the environmental clearance extension under the EIA Notification violates legal provisions, rendering it unconstitutional.
The amendments to environmental clearance validity in the notification and office memorandum were held unconstitutional, infringing environmental protections and the role of the expert appraisal comm....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
