A Public Interest Litigation filed before the Andhra Pradesh High Court is challenging the proposed Google-Adani data centre in Visakhapatnam, questioning both the project’s Environmental Clearance and the allotment of 160 acres of land.
The proposed project encompasses 160 acres of temple land belonging to Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam at Simhachalam. The land is situated across Adavivaram and Mudasarlova villages in Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, with the broader project ecosystem extending across Visakhapatnam and Anakapalli districts.
The PIL was filed by Bolisetty Satyanarayana, an environmental activist and Jal Biradari National Convenor. Among the concerns raised is the project’s proximity to Kambalokonda Wildlife Sanctuary and Mudasarlova Reservoir, along with questions about its substantial water and electricity requirements.
Court Proceedings and State Response
The court issued notice on the PIL, and when the matter was heard later, the State submitted before a Division Bench of Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Balaji Medamalli that all necessary steps were being taken within the parameters of law to ensure environmental protection.
The petitioner has challenged the project’s Category B2 Environmental Clearance, contending that the project site is only 0.86 kilometres from Kambalokonda Wildlife Sanctuary, where commercial construction within one kilometre is prohibited. He alleges that the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee minutes recorded the distance as 850 kilometres rather than 0.86 kilometres, arguing this error was material to whether distance norms applied and that the clearance was granted without public consultation.
The petition also raises concerns about Mudasarlova Reservoir, a source of drinking water for Visakhapatnam city. According to the filings, the reservoir is situated approximately 120 metres from the project site.
The petitioner has further alleged that the project site falls within an Eco-Sensitive Zone and contains around 200 trees. Of these, 40 are proposed to be felled and 20 transplanted. He contends that required permissions under the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 have not been obtained.
The PIL additionally challenges the allotment of the 160 acres of Simhachalam Devasthanam land, alleging that the transfer was completed without following mandatory procedure under Section 801b of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, including the requirement to issue notice to interested persons.
State Authority’s Defense
The State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, in its response, disputed these allegations and defended the Environmental Clearance. On the question of proximity to Kambalokonda Wildlife Sanctuary, the authority relied on the Forest Department’s inspection and the resulting Divisional Forest Officer’s No Objection Certificate. It submitted that the project site falls outside designated forest land.
The authority explained that the 850-kilometre distance recorded in the expert appraisal committee minutes was a typographical error. According to the authority, the PARIVESH Portal records the distance as approximately 850 metres. The Divisional Forest Officer’s No Objection Certificate separately records the sanctuary as 750 metres from the project area and its Eco-Sensitive Zone as 470 metres away.
The authority also submitted that data centres are not specifically listed in the schedule to the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006. Based on the project’s built-up area, it was assessed under Item 8a as a Category B2 Building and Construction Project. The authority maintained that such projects do not require a full Environment Impact Assessment report or public consultation and that the General Conditions of the notification do not apply to Item 8a projects.
Regarding the Mudasarlova Reservoir, the authority acknowledged it is a vital source of drinking water for Visakhapatnam and is located approximately 120 metres from the project site towards the east. It submitted that the Environmental Clearance contains a specific condition requiring the project proponent to ensure that project activities do not adversely impact the reservoir or the wildlife sanctuary.
Environmental Management Plan
The project proponent has allocated Rs. 900 lakh as capital cost and Rs. 155 lakh per annum as recurring cost towards the Environmental Management Plan. The proponent has also volunteered to develop avenue plantation in Visakhapatnam city as part of its corporate social responsibility activity and maintain the plantation until it matures.
The matter is listed for further hearing.
Case: Bolisetty Satyanarayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Case Number: W.P. PIL No.137 of 2026