IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR AND THE HON’BLE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI
CONTEMPT CASE No.2230 of 2013
BETWEEN Smt. K. Pushpamma.
AND
Mr. B. Sirdhar, IAS, District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.
…PETITIONER …RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. CH. SHASHI BHUSHAN Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order:
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar)
Alleging non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 20.12.2012 in WP.No.39123 of 2012, this contempt case is filed.
2. Respondent has filed counter specifically stating in para 3 as under:
“In reply to Para No.4 & 5 of the affidavit, it is submitted that, in pursuance of the Hon’ble Court Orders Dt:20.12.2012 the Environmental Engineer, APPCB, R.R. District has submitted a report stating that, the Jaggery Unit is established in SY.No.346/1 over 2 acres of land in Turmamidi Village. The Baggage is used as fuel for the batties for heating the sugarcane juice. Due to firing of baggages smoke is released from the chimneys. Water is not used in the process of Jaggery Manufacturing. The Vessels used for boiling the sugarcane juice are washed once in a week and the washed water is let out on land. This unit has not taken any permission from District Industries Centre and other departments. This is an extension of agricultural activity and nuisance to the surroundings. The Complainant stated that agriculture is affected by the above activity, therefore requested to take action U/s. 133 of Cr.P.C. On the report of Environmental Engineer APPCB, R.R. District. The Tahsildar, Bantwaram Mandal has initiated action and issued notice vide letter No.B/48/13 dated: 05.03.2013 and stopped the activity of Jaggery Unit and submitted reports vide letters numbers (10 B/48/2013 dated: 10.04.2013 and (2) B/707/2013, Dt: 26- 122-13 to this respondent.”
3. Appropriate orders having been passed in pursuance of the directions of this Court, nothing further survives for consideration.
The contempt case is accordingly closed. The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J
M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J
April 25, 2014 DSK