B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THE notice dated 16-10-2000 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, the 3rd respondent herein directing the petitioner to stop the manufacture of bricks on the pain of action being initiated under section 133 Cr. P. C. is impugned in this writ petition. The notice is self-explanatory. In the notice, it is alleged that the petitioner started a cement brick unit at Rangampeta village causing sound and air pollution. The petitioner was already put on notice by the 3rd respondent on 10-10-2000 requiring her to stop the manufacture until further orders. ( 2 ) IN this writ petition, learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri K. Venkatesh contends that the unit where the cement bricks are being manufactured by the petitioner is far away from the village. It is also submitted that it is not causing any sound and air pollution to the residents of the village. It is the case of the petitioner that even before the proceedings under Section 133 Cr. P. C. are initiated, the 3rd respondent could not have directed the petitioner to stop the manufacture of bricks. ( 3 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed by the residents of the village, it is stated in categorical terms that this brick unit is situated in the midst of the village surrounded by the houses. The activity carried on by the petitioner is resulting in air pollution leading to health hazards. ( 4 ) THE question as to whether the unit is situated in the midst of the village causing any pollution as such cannot be gone into by this Court. Suffice it to hold that the notice issued by the 3rd respondent itself does not require any interference of this court in exercise of its jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India. This court is required and bound to take the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed by the villagers that the petitioner s unit is causing pollution. It is well settled that right to fresh air is an integral part of right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court has to be careful in granting interim orders, particularly in matters affecting the rights of the citizens on account of pollution. It is well settled that right to fresh air is an integral part of right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court has to be careful in granting interim orders, particularly in matters affecting the rights of the citizens on account of pollution. The grant of interim order by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not a matter of course. Even in case of an irregular order, the Court need not always interfere and interdict such proceedings if the public interest so requires. ( 5 ) IN that background of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in this matter and continue the interim order. Therefore, the interim order earlier granted by this Court shall stand vacated. ( 6 ) INTERESTS of justice would be met by directing the 3rd respondent-Mandal revenue Officer to take appropriate action in accordance with law. The 3rd respondent had already indicated in the impugned notice that proceedings under Section 133 cr. P. C. are initiated against the petitioner. There is no legal impediment of setting the law in motion against the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall be given an adequate opportunity of representing his case and the 3rd respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law by duly taking into consideration the objections and the material to be made available by the petitioner. For the present, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. ( 7 ) WITH the observations as above, the writ petition shall stand disposed of.