The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Thursday directed the state government and the AP Pollution Control Board to file a report on the implementation of Supreme Court directions with regard to pollution control measures in Patancheru industrial area. While dealing with a batch of writ petitions, a division bench comprising Justice B. Prakash Rao and C.Y. Somayajulu expressed dissatisfaction over the delay in the implementation of the Apex court orders. The Supreme court monitored the pollution control measures in this area for over a decade and then issued directions in 1998 fixing standards regarding pollutants and hydraulic load for each unit. The bench also expressed dissatisfaction over the absence of government counsel for the hearing . Justice Prakash Rao said "Do you need a red carpet welcome with a shahnai? Don't you feel the responsibility to be present in the court when the bench is hearing such an important public interest issue?" The bench asked the state government and the pollution control board to inform the court what they did to control pollution in the area. The government has been asked to inform what remedial measures have been taken so far for the citizens in the area suffering with geo chemical diseases. Mr P. Niroop, Supreme Court advocate who appeared on behalf of the local farmers, urged the court to direct the industries in the Patancheru industrial area to deposit Rs 100 crore for the safety of the people residing in the areas. 2 petitions against Bhu Bharathi survey The Integrated Land information system titled "Bhu Bharathi" which was launched by the state government with the objective of finding a solution to the land disputes in the state, has landed in a legal tangle. The project was aimed at compiling all details of land and its titles which would enable the title holders or authorities dealing with land matters to have a comprehensive report of any title at their disposal at just the click of a mouse. Infotech Enterprises Limited and IIC Technologies filed writ petitions in the AP High Court challenging the awarding of the contract to Speck Systems Limited by the Commissioner, Survey, Settlement and Land Records. They alleged that commercial bids were to be opened on March 19 but were opened on March 20 and the the authorities asked them to produce flying permission of the director general, Civil Aviation, for aerial flying. The petitioners said that none of the participants possessed the clearance from the Civil Aviation Authority and it cannot be obtained at such a short notice. They submitted that there was no justification in finalising the tenders in a hurry, particularly when the pilot project is yet to achieve minimum objectives. They urged the court to stay all further proceedings in Bhu Bharathi Scheme.