Andhra HC Lets Google–Adani Vizag Data Centre Work Continue at Developer's Own Risk, Mint Reports
Mint reported that on Oct. 6 the Andhra Pradesh High Court bench of Chief Justice Lisa Gill allowed Vizag Hyperscale Data Center Park Ltd — the Adani Infra SPV building the Google–Adani Visakhapatnam AI data centre — to keep working on the site "at its own risk and cost," with any investment made not vesting equities if the final decision goes against the project. The court is hearing a PIL by activist Bolisetty Satyanarayana alleging environmental-permission gaps and use of temple-trust land; the state says the land was leased, not transferred. This is one outlet's account of an interim order; The Hindu's Oct. 5 pre-ruling piece names a different respondent (Raiden Infotech) in related coverage.
India's flagship hyperscale AI build is still moving dirt — but the court has put the legal risk on the builder. Money spent now buys no protection if clearances fail.
Mint reported that on Tuesday, October 6, the Andhra Pradesh High Court bench of Chief Justice Lisa Gill allowed Vizag Hyperscale Data Center Park Ltd, the Adani Infra SPV building the Google–Adani Visakhapatnam data centre, to keep working on the site "at its own risk and cost." The court said any investment made "shall not vest any equities" if the final decision goes against the project. Attribute the Oct. 6 order to Mint; a second report of that order was not available here.
The petition and the state's reply
The court is hearing a public-interest petition by activist Bolisetty Satyanarayana. Per Mint, it alleges gaps in environmental permissions: the project was treated as a Category B/B2 building project; the site is about 0.86 km from the Kambalakonda Wildlife Sanctuary; and 160 acres of land belonging to the Simhachalam Devasthanam temple trust are being used. The state says the land was leased, not transferred, earns the temple about ₹26 crore a year, and that state-level clearance is correct. Work is at the stage of demolition, levelling, tree cutting and a boundary wall.
Mint describes the project as a $15 billion, 1 GW campus with Google and Bharti Airtel. Treat the temple-land point as the petitioner's claim plus the state's response.
Entity and capacity hedges
On October 5, The Hindu reported the same bench had posted the hearing to Oct. 6 and said there could be "no relaxation of environmental conditions." That piece is pre-ruling context, not a source for the Oct. 6 order. It names Raiden Infotech (described as an Alphabet subsidiary) as the developer whose clearances are challenged, while Mint names the Adani SPV Vizag Hyperscale Data Center Park Ltd. They may be different respondents in the same PIL; treat them as distinct until confirmed. Capacity figures also differ: Mint's 1 GW versus counsel figures quoted in The Hindu — use Mint's 1 GW for this order piece, or attribute both.
Limits
- Single source for the Oct. 6 order (Mint). Case ongoing; interim only.
- Respondent naming differs across Mint and The Hindu (Oct. 5).
- Temple-land and environmental allegations are pleadings and state replies, not adjudicated findings.
- Capacity: prefer Mint 1 GW with attribution.