Andhra Pradesh High Court Criticizes GVMC Commissioner for Protecting Officials in CRZ Violation
The Andhra Pradesh High Court delivered a stern rebuke on Thursday, targeting the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC) commissioner for allegedly shielding officials who failed to prevent the illegal construction of a concrete wall within the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ).
Court Orders Action Against Erring Officials
A bench led by Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice R Raghunanadan Rao directed the principal secretary of municipal administration and urban development to identify the responsible officials and initiate departmental proceedings against them. The court expressed frustration over the GVMC commissioner's repeated failure to provide details of the officers who permitted the construction at Bheemunipatnam beach in Visakhapatnam.
Background of the Public Interest Litigation
The case originated from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Jana Sena corporator P Murthy Yadav, who highlighted the inaction of GVMC officials in stopping illegal constructions in the ecologically sensitive CRZ area. Previously, the High Court had ordered the demolition of all illegal structures and imposed a penalty on Penaka Neha Reddy, daughter of former MP V Vijay Sai Reddy and owner of the building in question.
Non-Compliance with Court Directives
The court had issued two separate directives to the GVMC commissioner to submit a list of officials accountable for the illegal construction. On both occasions, these orders were not complied with, leading the bench to observe that the commissioner was attempting to protect the erring officials. Additionally, the court mandated the removal of all construction debris resulting from the demolition of the concrete wall.
Related CRZ Case Involving Resto Bars
In a connected PIL challenging the GVMC's inaction in removing four resto bars within the same CRZ area, the High Court noted that a deeper examination was necessary. This matter has been scheduled for a hearing after four weeks, indicating ongoing judicial scrutiny of CRZ violations in the region.
The court's actions underscore a firm stance against environmental negligence and administrative lapses, emphasizing accountability in governance.
