National Green Tribunal
Saguturu Dayaker Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 15 September, 2022
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.01 to 09: Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No.114 of 2020 (SZ)
to
Original Application No. 122 of 2020 (SZ) &
I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mallapu Chengamma
W/o Venkataiah,
Aged about 60 years
Kokkupalem Village, Mallam Post,
Chittamuru Mandal
SPSR Nellore District - 524 403.
Having agriculture land
Survey No. 18-5,21-1,21-2,21-6,56-5,56-6,57-2,
Kokkupalem village, Chittamuru Mandal.
...Applicant/O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ)
Pantrangam Ramasubbaiah
S/o Venkata Subbaiah,
Aged about 67 years
Resident of Vallipuram Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.143-6B, 240-3A, 304-3B, 240-5A1,
301-1, 302-1, 302-2A, 238-5, 239-2, 304-2A
Ranganadhapuram, Chittamuru Mandal
...Applicant/O.A. No.115 of 2020 (SZ)
Poluru Murali
S/o Anandaiah,
Aged about 40 years
Resident of Vallipuram Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.29-4, 39, 41, 64-4, 76-3A, 77-1/10,
78-1, 82-1, Ranganadhapuram, Chittamuru Mandal
...Applicant/O.A. No.116 of 2020 (SZ)
Nalajam Sreenivasulu
S/o Chengaiah,
Aged about 42 years
Resident of Vallipuram Mallam Village & Post
Page 1 of 140
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.45-1, 65-4
Ranganadhapuram, Chittamuru Mandal
...Applicant/O.A. No.117 of 2020 (SZ)
Vinnamala Muni Sekhar Reddy
S/o Muni Ratnam Reddy,
Aged about 43 years
Resident of Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.104-1P, 104-4P, 105-1, 105-5P
Ranganadhapuram, Chittamuru Mandal
...Applicant/O.A. No.118 of 2020 (SZ)
Saguturu Krishna Reddy
S/o Venkata Subbareddy,
Aged about 62 years
Resident of Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.56-1, 56-2
Ranganadhapuram, Chittamuru Mandal
...Applicant/O.A. No.119 of 2020 (SZ)
Pantrangam Subrahmanyam
S/o Subrahmanyam,
Aged about 44 years
Resident of Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.207-6, 207-5, 205-1
Mallam Village.
...Applicant/O.A. No.120 of 2020 (SZ)
Poluru Bhargavi
S/o Muni Ratnam Reddy,
Aged about 32 years
Resident of Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.74-17, 74-2
Ranganadhapuram
...Applicant/O.A. No.121 of 2020 (SZ)
Page 2 of 140
Saguturu Dayaker Reddy
S/o Venkata Subba Reddy,
Aged about 47 years
Resident of Mallam Village & Post
Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.
Andhra Pradesh - 524 403.
Having Agriculture land at:-
Survey No.59-1P, 59-2, 60-2P, 105-2P, 104-3P, 104-6P, 62-2P
Ranganadhapuram Village
...Applicant/O.A. No.122 of 2020 (SZ)
VERSUS
1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Through its Chief Secretary
1st Block,1st Floor,Interim Government Complex,
A.P Secretariat Office,
Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh- 522503
2. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
Through its Member Secretary
D.No.33-26-14 D/2, Near Sunrise Hospital
Pushpa Hotel Centre,Chalamalavari Street,
Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada- 520 010.
3. DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
State of Andhra Pradesh
Through its Commissioner
Bandar Road, Poranki,
Vijayawada - 521137
Andhra Pradesh
4. COASTAL AQUACULTURE AUTHORITY
Through its Member Secretary
5th Floor, Integrated Office Complex for
Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department,
Nandanam,
Chennai - 600 035,Tamilnadu.
5. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE
Achari Street, VRC Centre,
Nellore District,
Andhra Pradesh 524003
6. Sri. Volipi Seenivasulu
Resident of Venkanapalem Kota SO,
Kota Mandal Nellore Dt. 524411
Page 3 of 140
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 13-1A, 5, 19, 27-9, 27-7, 29-2, 27-8,
27-6,27-5,27-4,27-3, 29-1, 29-2,29-3, 15-1, 3, 18-2B1
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
7. Sri. KamiReddy Balasuneel Reddy
C/o Parvathareddy Venkata Ramanareddy
Resident of Mallam village and post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt.
PIN-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 15-6
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.524415
8. Sri. Teegala Suresh Babu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 1, 3-2B
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
9. Sri. Pitti Parandhamaiah
Resident of: Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 17-2
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
10. Smt. Manubolu Sailaja
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 15
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 4 of 140
11. Sri. Manubolu Sathish
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 14-3, 28-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
12. Sri. Theegala Suresh Babu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 9A, A3,B,C
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
13. Sri. Manubolu Venkaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 27-5,32-5,33-2,33-4, 31-2,31-1,55-5,12,17,31-7, 39-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
14. Sri. Pamanji Chinna Chengaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 27-4
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
15. Smt. Kapaluru Varalakshmi
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 70-2
Page 5 of 140
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
16. Smt. Theruvai Bujjamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 1-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
17. Sri. Theruvai Thirupalu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 33-4, 39-4B
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
18. Smt. Parri Koteshwaramma
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 50-2,68-2,3, 69-1,70-3, 72-2, 79-4,78,79-3 ,79-4, 78-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
19. Smt. Chellakuru Madhusudhanamma
Resident of Gonugunta
Mambattu post Nellore District
Pin-524121
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 17-2A,21-4, 12-3,4,5
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 6 of 140
20. Sri. Paravathareddy Venkataramana Reddy
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 17-2B,18-2PA, 20-1,21-5, 27-P2,
23-1,16-2A,11-1A,13-3
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
21. Sri. Paravathareddy Venkatakrishna Reddy
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No: 17-2C,18-2A1, 20-2, 21-6,
27-P1, 23-2,16-2B,11-2, 13-2
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
22. Sri. Pernati Prabhakar Reddy
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 15-4A,21-1
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
23. Smt. Pernati Subbamma
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 15-4C,21-3
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 7 of 140
24. Sri. Kalluru Rajendra Babu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 32-6
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO, Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
25. Sri. Manubolu Sathish
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.33-1A,38-2,27-3,38-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
26. Sri. Theruvai Thirupalu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.33-1C,60-1,60-4,60-7
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
27. Sri. Nunjala Madhu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 33-1C
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
28. Smt. Manubolu Ragamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 38-1A
Page 8 of 140
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
29. Sri. Manubolu Venkaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.38-4A, 39-2,39-3,17-1,31-3, 38-7
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
30. Sri.Pamanji Chinna Chengaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 38-5,38-8
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
31. Smt. Manubolu Sailaja
Resident of Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 7-2A
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
32. Sri. Theruvai Chandraiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.39-4A,60-3, 41
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 9 of 140
33. Smt. Pamanji Chengamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.36-1A
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
34. Smt. Manubolu Indhiramma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.36-1B
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
35. Smt. Kalluru Susilamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.36-1C
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
36. Smt. Nunjala Padma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.36-1E1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
37. Smt. Thevuvai Bagyalakshmi
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.36-2
Page 10 of 140
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
38. Smt. Theruvai Bujjama
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-52441
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 60-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-52441
39. Sri. Parri Vijaykumar
Resident of Mallam post and village
Chittamuru Mandal
Nellore District
Pin-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.50-2B
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
40. Sri. Allipoodi Sreenivasulu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.105-5
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
41. Sri. Allipoodi Babu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.105-5
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 11 of 140
42. Sri. Pitti Munaswami
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.91-2C
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
43. Sri. Pitti Lokaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.94
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
44. Sri. Pitti Venkateshwarulu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Sri. Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.63-2
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
45. Sri. Manubolu Vekateshwarulu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.41
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
46. Sri. Kanapa Guravaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.52-3, 53-3
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Page 12 of 140
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
47. Sri.Pitti Subramanium
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
48. Sri. Pandhi Kottaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
49. Sri. Kakani Chengaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
50. Smt. Pitti Jayalakshmi
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.4-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 13 of 140
51. Sri. Pitti Amaraiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.5-2A
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
52. Smt. Pitti Chandhramma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.8-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
53. Smt. Vengalareddy Shyamalamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.9-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
54. Sri. Pitti Hanumanthaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.20-2B,9-2,10,13, 20-2,28-2
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
55. Sri. Pitti Krishnaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.20-3 23-5, 23-6
Page 14 of 140
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
56. Sri. Chinthareddy Kota Reddy
Resident of Muttimbaku village and post, Vakadu SO
Vakadu Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.24-3
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
57. Smt. Basivireddy Rajamma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.29-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
58. Sri. Pamanji Baskar
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.30-2B
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
59. Smt. Duvvuru Sunitha
Resident of Mallam village and post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt.
PIN-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.31-6B
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Page 15 of 140
60. Sri. Kalluru Vekateshwarulu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No.32-1
Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
61. Smt. Pitti Parandhamaiah
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 3-2A
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
62. Sri. Kaamireddy Vijayasekar Reddy
Resident of Mallam village and post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt. PIN-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 7-3, 7-4, 7-7,7-10, 9-1,9-2,9-3
Demuni Kandriga, Mallam village & post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt.
63. Sri. Kalahasti Vasanthamma
Resident of Mallam village & post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt. PIN-524403
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 181-2
Mallam village & post
Chittamuru Manadal Nellore Dt.
64. Sri. Pitti Venkateswarlu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 3-P1. Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post,
Vakadu SO Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
65. Sri. Pitti Venkateswarlu
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 3-P1.
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Page 16 of 140
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt.
Pin-524415
66. Sri. Pitti Chandramma
Resident of Pittivaanapali village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
Having Prawn/Shrimp Aqua farm at:-
Survey No. 5-1.
Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Muttimbaku post, Vakadu SO
Chittamuru Mandal Nellore Dt. Pin-524415
(Respondents Nos.12, 13, 16, 27, 29, 33, 36, 47,
49, 50, 51, 53, 57, 60, 64 and 65 were deleted
from the party array as per Order dated
31.01.2022 in I.A. Nos.190, 191, 192, 193, 194,
203, 195, 196 and 197 of 2021 (SZ) in O.A.
Nos.114 to 122 of 2020 (SZ) respectively)
...Respondent(s)/
O.A. Nos.114 to122 of 2020
(In all these cases)
For Applicant(s): Mr. G. Stanley Hebzon Singh.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1 to R3, R5.
Mr. A.R. Sakthivel for R4.
Ms. Suneetha for R7, R18 to R23.
Mr. R. Palaniandavan for R10, R28, R31 & R34.
Judgment Reserved on: 22nd August 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 15th September 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
Whether the Judgment is allowed to be published on the Internet - Yes.
Whether the Judgment is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter - Yes.
Page 17 of 140
COMMON JUDGMENT
Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member
1. The above applications have been filed by different applicants raising same environmental issues alleging that the party respondents Nos.6 to 66 in all these cases and some other persons whose addresses were not known to the applicants are doing unauthorized shrimp culture in the agricultural lands without obtaining necessary permission or license from the authorities constituted under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority situated adjacent to the agricultural lands of the applicants.
2. According to the applicants, on account of such illegal activity carried on by respondents No.6 to 66 and others, large scale untreated effluents were being discharged into the neighbouring agricultural lands belonging to the applicants resulting in damage to the soil, affecting the fertility of the soil, resulting in loss of income and affecting the growth of the agricultural plants that were planted in the property.
3. They were also discharging the untreated effluents into the Swarnamukhi River and its branches situated in Chittamuru Mandal, Nellore District of State of Andhra Pradesh, thereby causing water pollution and this water is being used for irrigation indirectly affecting the fertility and growth of the agricultural produce cultivated in the agricultural land situated therein. They were drawing the water unauthorizedly from the water bodies without obtaining necessary permission and this is likely to cause depletion in the groundwater level, creating scarcity of water in summer season. The Hon'ble Apex Court in S. Jagannath Vs. Union of India & Ors.1 had discussed about the consequence of allowing large scale shrimp culture cultivation along the coastal zone and the agricultural lands and its necessity to regulate such activities in order to avoid possible pollution being caused to the environment. They have sustained severe damage to their agricultural lands and also sustained loss of income from their agricultural activities due to this unauthorized activity. The applicant in each cases had detailed the extent of land, survey number and quantum of compensation claimed which were detailed in the table below:-
1 AIR 1997 SC 811 Page 18 of 140 Original Extent of the Land and the Compensation Application Nos. years for thecompensation Claimed claimed in the Application 114/2020- 30000 X 3.21acres X 4 years for 3,85,200 Mallapu the years 16-17 to 19-20 Chengamam 115/2020- 30000 X 1.85 acres X 4 years for 2,22,000 Pantrangam theyears 16-17 to 19-20 Subramanyam 116/2020- Poluru 30000 X 4.07 acres X 4 years for 4,88,200 Murali the years 16-17 to 19-20 117/2020- 30000 X 1.82 acres X 4 years for 2,18,400 Nalajam the years 16-17 to 19-20 Srinivasalu 118/2020- 30000 X 3.82 acres X 4 years for 4,58,400 Vinnamala Muni the years 16-17 to 19-20 Sekhar Reddy 119/2020- 30000 X 4.01 acres X 4 years for 4,81,200 SaguturuKrishna the years 16-17 to 19-20 Reddy 120/2020- 30000 X 6.88 acres X 4 years for 8,25,600 Pantrangam the years 16-17 to 19-20 Subrahmanyam 121/2020-Poluru 30000 X 1 acre X 4 years for the 1,20,000 Bhargavi years 16-17 to 19-20 122/2020- 30000 X 4.01 acres X 4 years for 4,81,200 SaguturuDayakar the years 16-17 to 19-20 Reddy
4. Though complaints were made to the authorities, no action was taken by the authorities. That prompted the applicant in all these cases to file a independent applications, claiming the following common reliefs and compensation as stated above:-
I. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to take action against the persons who are/were carrying on the illegal prawn/shrimp aqua culture at Pittivaanapali Village, Ranganathapuram Village, Padarthyvari Kandriga village and Mallam Village.
II. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to initiate strict action against the Respondent Nos.6 to 66 for carrying on the illegal prawn/shrimp aqua culture in the above mentioned survey numbers of Pittivaanapali Village, Ranganathapuram Village, Padarthyvari Kandriga village and Mallam Village.
III. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to ensure the restoration of lands to its original state and recover the cost of restoration from the persons carrying on illegal prawn/shrimp culture at Pittivaanapali Village, Ranganathapuram Village, Padarthyvari Kandriga village and Mallam Village.
IV. Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 5 not to grant permissions/clearance/consent to any person, persons, farms, entities, body corporate, companies, for carrying out prawn/shrimp aqua culture in the fertile lands of Ranganathapuram village, Pittivaanapali Village, Padarthyvari Kandriga village and Mallam Page 19 of 140 Village as laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of S.Jagannath V.Union of India & Ors.
V. Direct Respondent Nos.6 to 66 to pay Environmental Compensation for polluting the Environment especially the water bodies.
VI. Direct Respondent Nos.6 to 66 jointly and severally to pay compensation amount (as detailed in the table mentioned above) to the applicants respectively for the loss of crops and damage caused to the applicants‟ agricultural land under Sec.15(1) of the NGT Act,2010.
VII. Pass any order or orders as this Hon‟ble Tribunal may deem fit and appropriate in the facts and the circumstances of the present Application
5. When the matter came up for admission, the learned counsel appearing for the State Respondents viz., Respondents Nos.1 to 5 submitted that on getting complaint about the activities, the District Collector had constituted a committee at different levels to look into the matter and to take appropriate action. According to the learned counsel, some of the unauthorized structures made in the shrimp farm had already been demolished and the process was still going on and if some time was granted, they may be able to file the report.
6. While admitting the matter, after having been satisfied that there arose a substantial question of environment in all these cases, by Order dated 22.07.2020, admitted the matters and appointed a Joint Committee comprising of (i) the District Collector - Nellore District or a Senior Officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector or Sub-Division Magistrate to be deputed by him, (ii) Joint Director of Fisheries Department, (iii) Senior Officer from State Pollution Control Board - Andhra Pradesh to be designated by the Chairman, (iv) Senior Officer from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and (v) a Professor from Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Guntur to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found and if there is any environmental damage caused on account of such unauthorised functioning of the shrimp/prawn cultivation in the agriculture land and due to illegal discharge of untreated effluents into the water bodies and the agricultural lands as alleged in the applications, then what is the nature of damage caused to the agricultural lands and assess the compensation, including the loss of income sustained by the applicants.
Page 20 of 1407. The Joint Committee was also directed to ascertain as to whether the persons who are conducting shrimp/prawn culture are having necessary permission from the concerned authorities and whether the area is critically overexploited or semi-critically exploited area regarding the availability of water and whether there was any permission obtained for drawing water from the water bodies. The Joint Director - Department of Fisheries was designated as the nodal agency for co-ordination and also for providing necessary logistics for this purpose.
8. Notices sent to respondents Nos.13 and 29 were returned as 'no more', respondents Nos.48 & 59 were returned as 'refused', respondents Nos.49, 53, 57 & 60 were returned as 'no such addressee' and respondents Nos.51 & 65 were returned as 'addressee left'.
9. The applicant in all these cases filed I.A. Nos.190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 203, 195, 196 and 197 of 2021 (SZ) in O.A. Nos.114 to 122 of 2020 (SZ) respectively to delete Respondents Nos.12, 13, 16, 27, 29, 33, 36, 47, 49, 50, 51, 53, 57, 60, 64 and 65 and those applications were allowed and they were deleted from the party array.
10. The 3rd respondent filed common counter affidavit in all these cases denying majority of the allegations made in the application except those are expressly admitted in the counter statement. They contended that certain representations have been received from the agricultural farmers of Mallam village of Chittamur Mandal stating that the Mallam tank in Chittamur Mandal is main source of water for Irrigation for their paddy fields which receives water through Pulikaluva & Royyalakaluva Feeder Channels and the Aqua farmers have raised aqua ponds for cultivation of shrimp Prawn Culture and releasing the waste contaminated water into the drains of Pulikaluva & Royyalakaluva canals and the entire contaminated water is entering into the Mallam MI tank results in huge losses for the agricultural lands affecting their paddy production and requested to take necessary steps against the unauthorized shrimp culture activity and take action against them for illegally discharging the untreated effluents into the water bodies. In order to resolve the issue and the demands made by the agriculturists in that area, Mandal and Page 21 of 140 Divisional level committees have been constituted by the District Collector SPSR Nellore vide Proceeding No.1053/D/2019 dated 03.07.2020 and directed the committee members to take up detailed survey on existing Aqua ponds in the villages at Pittivanipalli, Ranghnadhapuram & Mallam of Chittamur Mandal and submit detailed inspection reports without delay. On the request of Mallam ryots, and basing of preliminary ground level reality, the Fisheries department have already issued notices to the Aqua farmers who are engaged in unauthorized shrimp farming in Pittavani palli, Padharthivari kandriga asking them not to release waste water into the drains of Pulikaluva & Royyalakaluva. The Divisional and Mandal Level Committee removed the aerators and the bunds of Aqua ponds in Assigned & DKT lands of Scheduled Tribe's on 08.02.2020 and also disconnected the illegal electricity connections as per the instructions issued by the Sub Collector Gudur. In response to the above notices, Sri. Parvathareddy Venkata Ramana Reddy and 5 others filed a writ petition in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the action of the Electricity Department and the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No.9442/2020 by order dated 29.05.2020, posted the case after 3 weeks to enable the respondents to file detailed counter and in the meanwhile, the respondents were directed not to interfere with the enjoyment of the lands and the prawn culture activities mentioned in the Writ Petition. Based on the above orders, the Electricity Department had not disconnected the electric supply in respect of the aqua ponds related to the writ petitioners therein. On the basis of the representation made by the villagers of Mallam village on 01.06.2020, the Sub Collector - Gudur has directed the Mandal team of Executive Engineer - Electricity, Assistant Director - Fisheries, Executive Engineer - Irrigation, Agriculture Officer - Chittamur, Executive Engineer - Pollution Control Board, Executive Engineer - Ground Water, Executive Engineer - RWS and Tahsildar - Chittamur to conduct joint inspection on 02.06.2020 and remove all illegal constructions that are causing pollution of Mallam tank. On the basis of the direction issued by the Sub Collector - Gudur, the Mandal team had conducted joint inspection on 01.06.2020 but due to insufficient police force, it was not possible to close the illegal supply of Page 22 of 140 waste water into Pulikaluva & Royyalakaluva. Again with sufficient police force, the Mandal team inspected the area on 05.06.2020 and removed the illegal encroachments in Pulikaluva, closed the flowing of waste water channels in Pulikaluva laid by the aqua ryots of Vakadu Mandal through Proclain in Pittivanipalli village in 2 places. In Padarthivarikandriga, Sri. Valipi Seenaiah and Budanam Venkatarathnam were found discharging waste water from their aqua ponds in to Royyalakaluva at 2 places through sluices and both the sluices were closed with proclain by the Mandal team on 05.06.2020 and they have produced the photos showing the action taken and on account of the action taken by them, the waste water from the aqua ponds were not discharged to Royyalakaluva. In Ranganathauram village, big sluices through which waste water was discharged through Royyalakaluva were also removed and thereby, discharge/flow of untreated sewage from the aqua ponds into Royyalakaluva were prevented and the pollution caused to the same were also prevented. While removing the unauthorised sluices in the aqua ponds of Scheduled Tribes taken out for lease by l. Valipi Seenaiah S/o Ankaiah 2. Malli Sreenivasulu S/o Ramanaiah and 3. Yanamala Chenchaiah S/o Chenchaiah were resisted the proclain but they were removed with the assistance of police and the sluices throwing waste water into Palamadugukaluva to Royyalakaluva were removed, as they were not having any permission from the Aquaculture Authority and drawing ground water for aquaculture in violation of the Aquaculture Authority rules. While so, some of the farmers from the Chittamur Mandal had approached this Tribunal by filing petitions from O.A. No. 114 to 122 of 2020 contending that no action was taken, though action was taken by the District Administration and it was under enquiry as well. This Tribunal had appointed a Joint Committee and directed them to conduct inspection and file a report with certain Terms of Reference. As directed by this Tribunal, the District Collector - SPSR Nellore has appointed a committee containing the members directed to be as members of the committee as directed by the Tribunal vide proceedings Rc.No.1053/D/2019 dated 03.08.2020 under supervision of Sub Collector & Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gudur with the following members. "1. Joint Director, Fisheries, SPSR Nellore. 2. Executive Engineer, Pollution Control Board, SPSR Nellore. 3. Sri A. Antony Xavier, Director Page 23 of 140 (Technical) Coastal Aquaculture Authority, Department of Fisheries, Chennai.
4. Principal, Scientist (Agro) & Head Saline Water Scheme, Acharya NG Ranga University, Bapatla." The committee appointed by this Tribunal had inspected the aqua farming conducted by various persons including the party respondents in the villages of Mallam, Pittivanipalli, Ranganadapuram & Padarthivarikandriga of Chittamur Mandal on 27.08.2020 and they have made the following observations and recommendations as follows:-
"Recommendations:
a) The lessees should take necessary measures to convert the lands which are not fit for agriculture into shrimp ponds.
b) Only lands which are not fit for agriculture which were certified by the Agriculture Department should be allowed to convert into brackish water shrimp culture and for Aqua cultivation.
c) The mechanism should consist of Senior Agricultural Scientist, Officers from the board of pollution and Control, Fisheries, Ground Water and Audit as members of the agency.
d) In order to avoid problems of ground water Stalinization, drawal of ground water is strictly prohibited for shrimp aquaculture. It must be ensured that piezometers / ground water monitoring bore wells preferably 4 / ha (along the periphery of the pond) are installed to monitor salinity ingress. In case of salinity ingress, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority should ensure immediate closure of the farms.
e) An underground pipe line may be constructed which may be convenient to drain the waste water freely. The drain should be connected to salt pond or Buckingham canal whichever is nearer to the ponds. The cost of constructing the drain will be collected from shrimp cultivators irrespective of owners of the land. (OR)
f) A common drain system may be connected to a pond which the cost of construction has been shared between public and the owner of shrimp cultivators irrespective of owner ship of the land in the ratio of 25:75.
g) Take necessary measures to all high saline ground water for shrimp farming because the saline water with high PH value is unfit for agricultural and drinking purposes' But, as such farm shall have pollution free or eco friendly drain system.
h) Category wise land utilization with survey numbers may be tagged with GPS to prevent encroachments of Government lands.
i) Necessary measures should be taken to reclaim the agricultural lands and the cost of reclaiming will be collected from the responsible shrimp cultivators.
j) The departments concerned may take necessary steps to quick disposal of the legal issues in the Honorable courts by timely responding according to the directions of the Honorable courts.
k) To include Ground Water Department, Irrigation Department and Forest Department as a members into the District Level Committee (DLC) where the application for approval of Aqua ponds is being scrutinized and finalized.
l) To disconnect the Electrical connections this has been got un-authorized.
m). To demolish the Aqua ponds which have no approvals by duly following the procedure laid down under CAA Rules.
n) Minimum of 100mtrs distance may to be maintained between the Aqua ponds and Agricultural fields.
o) Minimum of 2 Kms distance may be maintain from the habitation containing more than 500 members to the Aqua ponds.
p) A committee consisting of different departments like Agriculture, Revenue, Electricity and Forest while issuing Electrical connections for Aquaculture may be constituted for issuing No Objection Certificate."Page 24 of 140
11. Out of the party respondents herein, 17 farms have been registered with CAA and the status of which was mentioned as follows:-
Respond- Registration No. Status of
Name of the Respondent Validity
ents No. As per CAA Renewal
1. Shri. Volipi Seenivasulu NIl Nil Nil
Shri. Kamireddy Balasuneel
2. Nil Nil Nil
reddy
Shri. Teegala Suresh Babu AP-II-2012 Expired on Not
3.
(15714) 19.04.2017 renewed
4. Shri. Pitti Parandhamaiah Nil Nil Nil
Smt. Manubolu Sailaja AP-II-2018
5. 06.01.2024 Active
(19816)
Shri. Manubolu Sathish AP-II-2018
6. 06.01.2024 Active
(19815)
Shri. Theegala Suresh Babu AP-II-2012 Same as respondent no.
7.
(15714) 8
Shri. Manubolu Venkaiah AP-II-2009 Expired on Not
8.
(9988) 18.10.2019 renewed
Shri. Pamanji Chinna AP-II-2009 Expired on Not
9.
Chengaiah (9070) 20.08.2014 renewed
Smt. Kapaluru Varalakshmi AP-II-2010 Not
10. 27.06.2015
(12393) renewed
Smt. Theruvai Bujjamma AP-11-2009 Expired on Not
11.
(9069) 20.08.2014 renewed
Shri. Theruvai Thirupalu AP-II-2009 Expired on Not
12.
(9068) 20.08.2014 renewed
Smt. Parri Koteshwaramma AP-II-2008 Not
13. 08.02.2014
(4789) renewed
Smt. Chellakuru AP-II-2018 Not
14. 06.01.2024
Madhusudhanamma (19580) renewed
Shri. Paravathareddy AP-11-2017
Venkataramana Reddy (18750) 21.11.2022
15. Active
AP-II-2018 06.01.2024
(19578)
Shri. Paravathareddy AP-II-2017
Venkatakrishna Reddy (18749) 21.11.2022
16. Active
AP-II-2018 06.01.2024
(19577)
Shri. Pernati Prabhakar AP-II-2017
17. 21.11.2022 Active
Reddy (18748)
Smt. Pernati Subbamma AP-II-2017
18. 21.11.2022 Active
(18751)
Shri. Kalluru Rajendra
19. Nil Nil Nil
babu
20. Shri. Manubolu Sathish Nil Nil Nil
21. Shri. Theruvai Thirupalu Nil Nil Nil
22. Shri. Nunjala Madhu Nil Nil Nil
23. Smt. Manubolu Ragamma Nil Nil Nil
24. Shri. Manubolu Venkaiah Nil Nil Nil
Shri. Pamanji Chinna
25. Nil Nil Nil
Chengaiah
Smt. Manubolu Sailaja AP-II-2018
26. 06.01.2024 Active
(19814)
27. Shri. Theruvai Chandraiah Nil Nil Nil
28. Smt. Pamanji Chengamma Nil Nil Nil
Smt. Manubolu
29. Nil Nil Nil
Indhiramma
30. Smt. Kalluru Susilamma Nil Nil Nil
31. Smt. Nunjala Padma Nil Nil Nil
Smt. Theruvai
32. Nil Nil Nil
Bagyalakshmi
33. Smt. Theruvai Bujjama Nil Nil Nil
34. Shri. Parri Vijaykumar Nil Nil Nil
35. Shri. Allipoodi Sreenivasalu Nil Nil Nil
36. Shri. Allipoodi Babu Nil Nil Nil
37. Shri. Pitti Munaswami Nil Nil Nil
38. Shri. Pitti Lokaiah Nil Nil Nil
Page 25 of 140
Shri. Pitti
39. Nil Nil Nil
Venkateshwarulu
Shri. Manubolu
40. Nil Nil Nil
Vekateshwarulu
41. Shri. Kanapa Guruvaiah Nil Nil Nil
42. Shri. Pitti Subramanium Nil Nil Nil
43. Shri. Pandhi Kottaiah Nil Nil Nil
44. Shri. Kakani Chengaiah Nil Nil Nil
45. Smt. Pitti Jayalakshmi Nil Nil Nil
46. Shri. Pitti Amaraiah Nil Nil Nil
47. Smt. Pitti Chandramma Nil Nil Nil
Smt. Vengalareddy
48. Nil Nil Nil
Shyamalamma
49. Shri. Pitti Hanumanthaiah Nil Nil Nil
50. Shri. Pitti Krishnaiah Nil Nil Nil
Shri. Chinthareddy Kota
51. Nil Nil Nil
Reddy
52. Smt. Basivireddy Rajamma Nil Nil Nil
53. Shri. Panmanji Baskar Nil Nil Nil
Smt. Duvvuru Sunitha AP-II-2017
54. 12.07.2022 Active
(18412)
Shri. Kalluru
55. Nil Nil Nil
Venkateshwarulu
56. Smt. Pitti Parandhamaiah Nil Nil Nil
Shri. Kamireddy
57. Nil Nil Nil
Vijayasekar Reddy
Shri Kalahasti
58. Nil Nil Nil
Vasanthamma
59. Shri. Pitti Venkateswarlu Nil Nil Nil
60. Shri. Pitti Venkateswarlu Nil Nil Nil
61. Shri. Pitti Chandramma Nil Nil Nil
12. Out of the 61 farmers (aquaculture farms) included as respondent in this case, 17 farms have been registered with CAA with an total extent of 32.33 Ha. and remaining were engaged in aquaculture activity without prior permission from the CAA. The details of the existing authorized and unauthorized Aqua farmers in those villages are as follows:-
S. Name of the Village No. of Authorized Unauthorized Total No. ponds No. of Extent No. of Extent No. of Extent farmers in Ha. farmers in Ha. farmers in Ha.
1 Pittivanipalli 148 18 17.75 81 60.21 99 77.96
2 Padarthivari 43 11 11.74 17 15.87 28 27.61
Kandriga
3 Ranganatha puram 98 03 07.29 37 63.88 40 71.17
Total 289 32 36.78 135 139.96 167 176.74
13. As per the above statement, 167 aqua farmers have taken up shrimp farming in 176.74 Ha., out of which 32 farmers are authorized with an extent of 36.78 Ha. and remaining 135 farmers were engaged in unauthorized aquaculture activity without obtaining permission from CAA in above said villages and they have given the details of both authorized and unauthorized aquaculture farms in Annexure - 1 attached to the counter. The officials of the Fisheries department have already issued notices to the unauthorized aqua farmers with a request to register Page 26 of 140 the aqua farms and to take up aqua farming and not to release salt water directly into agriculture fields and unauthorized aqua farming in coastal area are liable for punishment under CAA rules. They also reiterated the inspection conducted and action taken on the basis of the instructions of the Sub Collector, Gudur SPSR Nellore District on 01.06.2020 and 05.06.2020 and removal of the same. According to the 3rd respondent, on account of the action taken by the Mandal team, the flow of untreated effluent into the water body was stopped and thereby further pollution to the agricultural lands and water bodies were prevented. They also closed the big sluices through which the unauthorized discharge of aquaculture effluents were discharged into the water bodies were removed. The sample analysis report of the Principal, Scientist (Agro) & Head Saline Water Scheme, Acharya NG Ranga University, Bapatla, the soil suitability for paddy cultivation have been verified and tested with the applicants lands and there was no effect on soil nature of applicants for paddy cultivation except the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020, which was detailed below:-
Sl. O.A. Name of Village Survey pH EC Remarks No. No. farmers No. 1 117 Sri Nalajam Ranganadha 45-1 7.2 3.8 Slightly saline suitable Srinivasulu puram for paddy cultivation 2 122 Sri Saguturu -do- 104-3P 7.5 2.3 Slightly saline suitable Dayakar Reddy for paddy cultivation 3 118 Sri Vinnamala -do- 104-4P 7.3 1.1 Non-saline suitable for Munisekhar paddy cultivation Reddy 4 116 Sri Potluru -do- 78-1 6.0 0.5 Non-saline suitable for Murali paddy cultivation 5 119 Sri S. Krishna -do- 56-1 6.2 1.0 Non-saline suitable for Reddy paddy cultivation 6 121 Smt. Potluru -do- 74-2 6.4 0.7 Non-saline suitable for Bhargavi paddy cultivation 7 120 Sri Patrangam Mallam 207-5 5.7 0.8 Non-saline suitable for Subrahmanyam paddy cultivation 8 115 Sri Putragunta -do- 240-3A 5.8 3.0 Slightly saline suitable Ramasubbaiah for paddy cultivation 9 114 Smt. Maralaku Kokkupalem 18-5 6.9 23.2 Very strongly saline.
Chengamma Paddy yields decreased.
14. The representative of Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University who is the member of the Joint Committee reported that they collected 40 representative samples from different agricultural farmers' fields covering Ranganathapuram, Pittuvani Palli, Mallam, Kokupallem and Padharthivarikandriga villages of Chittamur Mandal and analyzed the soil salinity. Out of the 40 samples, 52.5% of samples were non-saline Page 27 of 140 (low), 20% were slightly saline, 17.5% were moderately saline, 5% were strongly saline and 5% were very strong saline. They also opined that paddy crop can be possible up to moderately saline soils, beyond this, the crop yields will be decline. A copy of the report was produced as Annexure - III. So, they inferred from the finding that no such alarming damage inflicted by the shrimp farms to the agricultural lands in the Chittamur Mandal as claimed by the applicants. The Guidelines for regulating Coastal Aquaculture was issued under Chapter II of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Rules, 2005 where it was provided to avoid problems of groundwater salination, drawl of groundwater is strictly prohibited for shrimp aquaculture. It must be ensured that piezometers / groundwater monitoring bore wells preferably 4/ha. (along the periphery of the pond) were installed to monitor salinity ingress. In case of salinity ingress, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority should ensure immediate closure of the farms. The Mallam tank is located in between 13.937805 latitude and 80.128354 longitude and also in between the Royyala vagu creek (in 13.953704 latitude, and 80.095988 longitude) in southern part and Upputeru creek (in 13.925609 latitude, and 80.134005 longitude) in northern side and it is having dried part adjacent to the Pulicat lake lagoon and within radius of 10 KMs to the Bay of Bengal. The Royyala vaugu creeks covers around 20 Kms in the Chitamur Mandal and finally merges into Upputeru near the Raviguntapalem Village of Vakadu Mandal. The Upputeru & Royyala vaugu creeks in and around Chittamur Mandal are historically known for high saline water due to constant tidal influx from Bay of Bengal and retention of saline water during summer.
It was further contended that Kondurupalem & Duggarajapatnam which are adjoining Mallam tank & Upputeru creek were known for Salt pans producing salt from high saline water available in the locality. The Puli Kaluva is a sub-drain channel originated form Kondapuram village from Royyala main drain channel and flows through Muttembaka and Vakadu villages and some of the villages of Chittamur Mandals and finally merges into Upputeru via. Royyalakalva and Puli Kalva drain channel flows for a distance of 8 - 10 KMs in the mandal. But due to scanty rain fall for the last few years, the water is not flowing along with the Pulikalva and dried up with up and down elevations and grown up Page 28 of 140 buses in the drain channel. The adjacent villages of Mallam tank such as Pittuvanipalli, Padarthivari Kandriga, Ranganathpurarn, Mallam of Chittamur Mandal and Muttembakam, Srinivasapuram, Duggarajapatnam and Anjalapuram, Kondurupalem in Vakadu Mandal are located adjacent to Pulicat lagoon covering in saline water at ground level and there is no fresh water for usage of drinking purpose. So, the drinking water is lifted to the above villages form Swarnamuki river through lift irrigation. The Pulicat lake lagoon Map & flow of water from Royyala Kalva to Upputeru & Pullkalva to Mallam tank were shown in Annexure - IV. The Aqua Zone process undertaken by the Department of Fisheries, Government of Andhra Pradesh as directed vide G.O.(MS).No.16 AHDD and Fisheries (Fish) Department dated:20.04.2018 classified the areas. As per part of Aquaculture Zone process, the potential aquaculture area with an extent of 22142.80 Ha. was published in the District Gazette Notification No. 23 dated 20-05-2019 in Nellore District. Out of which, 180.64 Ha. was published as potential area for aquaculture in Yelluru, Kogili & Pittivanipalli revenue village in Chittamur mandal and 347.73 Ha. was published as potential area for aquaculture in Duggarajapatnam, Konduru, Andalamala, Boodidalavagu, Muttembaka, Timur, Pathetipalem, Vaggaru, Tupilipalem, Jamen kothapalem, Vamedu and Pamanji revenue village in Vakadu mandal, evidenced by Annexure -V. Considering the suitability of such lands classified as agricultural lands which have salinity or saline water, the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide its G.O.(MS).No.128 Revenue (Assignment - I) Department dated 04.04.2016 issued an order to amend the Conduction No. 1 of the D form Patta format of assignment of agricultures' land to the landless and poor person prescribed in Appendix -V of Board standing orders 15 with the provision that the land may be used for pisci culture/aquaculture in addition to agriculture so as to enable use of assigned lands by the assignees for aquaculture to enhance the shrimp production, productivity which ultimately will improve livelihoods to the farmers, evidenced by Annexure - VI. Considering the suitability of the lands available in and around Chittamur Mandal, more than 350 ha. area has been registered for shrimp farming by CAA. All the areas in and around Chitamur Mandal cannot Page 29 of 140 be treated as fertile Agricultural land as claimed by the petitioner and engaging in shrimp farming inlands with access to saline water is legal as Per the provisions of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005. The allegation of the applications that the shrimp farms are discharging untreated waste and chemical effluents to the nearby water bodies is false and baseless. The shrimp is fragile and highly sensitive living creatures which will not survive any polluted water conditions. The water comes out of a shrimp farm which is growing shrimps in it cannot be claimed as waste and chemical effluent, since the algal biomass present in such drainage provides feed for the other organisms present in the natural environment as well. The shrimp farmers who laid the drainage pipelines for the draining the water from the shrimp farm into Pulli Kaluva, Ettigattu kaluva and Royyalavagu have been issued with Notices from the Department of Fisheries to remove such pipelines. The Coastal Aquaculture Authority and the Aqua Zonation principles of Government of Andhra Pradesh do not permit the conversion of Agricultural Lands into Shrimp Farms. However, considering the suitability of such lands classified as agricultural lands which have salinity or saline water, the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide its G.O (MS).No l28 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated: 04.04.2016 issued an order to amend the condition No.1 of the D form Patta format of assignment of agricultural land to the landless and poor person prescribed in Appendix- V of Board standing orders 15 with the provision that the land may be used for pisci culture/aquaculture in addition to agriculture so as to enable use of assigned lands by the assignees for aquaculture to enhance the shrimp production, productivity which ultimately will improve livelihoods to the farmers. So, they wanted the following things to be considered by the Tribunal while disposing the matter-
"i. Shrimp Farming as regulated by the Coastal Aquaculture Authority in areas identified and designated as Aquaculture Zones by the Government of Andhra Pradesh may kindly be permitted to continue.
ii. The drawl of ground water is strictly prohibited and hence the same shall be enforced accordingly.
iii. Action may be initiated on the shrimp farms operated without the mandatory registration under CAA Act 2005 in accordance with the provisions of the Section 14 of the CAA Act, 2005 which provides that if any person carries on Coastal aqua culture or traditional coastal aquaculture or causes the coastal aquaculture or traditional coastal aquaculture to be carried on in contravention of sub section (1) of Section 13, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. However, it is respectfully brought to the notice of the Hon'ble NGT Page 30 of 140 that the Government is actively considering a proposal to remove the provision of imprisonment as a punishment for carrying on coastal aquaculture without registration, as a part of decriminalization initiative.
iv. Sub section (d) of Section (d) of Chapter IV of CAA Act, 2005 provides that "subject to any guidelines issued by the Central Government under section 3, the Authority shall exercise the following powers and perform the following functions, namely:- (d) to order removal or demolition of any coastal aquaculture farms which is causing pollution after hearing the occupier of the farm."
15. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
16. The 7th respondent filed common counter in all these cases contending that he is one of the person who is alleged to have been involved in unauthorized aquaculture causing pollution in the application which he denied. It is further contended that he is the absolute owner of land comprised in Survey No. 15/6, Padarthivarikandriga Village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District. He is carrying on the business of prawn culture based upon the authorization granted by the competent authority and he was shown as authorized in the report placed by the authorities. The applicant's representative name was also included as the authorized aquaculture owner. The 7th Respondent had applied for registration of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority vide application dated 28.12.2018 and the same had been recommended by the Assistant Inspector of Fisheries vide certificate dated 28.12.2018. The District Level Committee had also approved the application of the respondent and recommended the same to Coastal Aquaculture Authority at Chennai for the purposes of registration. The 7th respondent's application has already been recommended and even as per the District Level Committee, it was approved. All the approvals as stated above have been granted and the necessary fees have also been paid. The report has also recommended the names of the respondent for approval and as such, it cannot be said to be an illegal act. Even as per the recommendation of the Assistant Inspector of Fisheries, the distance from the prawn ponds to the agricultural land is more than 500 meters and the source of water as per the report recommending case of the respondent is Upputeru. There was no bore well activity and the agricultural lands from the distance of 500 meters and hence there can never be any probability or even remote possibility of the 7th Respondent in any way causing pollution to the agricultural Page 31 of 140 lands let alone agricultural lands of the applicants. The report filed by various authorities before the tribunal fortify the submissions that the agricultural activities have not been affected and the yield has not been affected. The report of the Joint Director of Agriculture dated 23.08.2021 is relevant in this regard. So far as the contamination of drinking water sources is concerned, the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Gudur dated 18.08.2021 is relevant. It was specifically stated that the physical and chemical parameters are all in the safe range and the only village which has in habitant population is Pittuvanipalli and there is no population in Padartivari Kandriga. So, the applications were filed without verifying the details, but with false averments, so as to mislead the Tribunal. The saline water from the ponds are being let out into the Pala Maduguvagu which is only a draining canal and joins the Royalavagu downstream at the end of the Royala Vagu channel just before joins salt water creek of Pulicat Lake to the sea. The report of the water Resources Department fortifies the contention of the 7th Respondent. The 7th respondent's property is situated 500 meters away from agricultural land and the saline water is only being let out through the draining channel and there was no environmental pollution caused on account of their activity. He is legally carrying out the prawn culture in its property comprised in Survey No. 15/6. Though a Special Leave Petition was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court challenging the interim order passed by the National Green Tribunal dated 10.06.2020, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the same. Based on the interim order of the Tribunal, the Collector of the District issued notices to the 7th respondent threatening the disconnection of electricity and dispossession of prawn culture farm. Since he was conducting the same on the basis of the valid license issued by the Competent authority, due to the urgency, the 7th respondent filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Court of Andhra Pradesh and Hon'ble High Court was pleased to grant an interim order and directed the Respondents therein to consider the objections of the petitioner therein. The Writ Petition was only a stop gap arrangement and comprehensive adjudication can be done only by this Tribunal. The 7th Respondent had invested huge sum of money and it is only the source of survival/income for the entire family. He had also availed loan from Page 32 of 140 the bank in order to start the prawn culture activity. They were unnecessarily dragged to the proceedings and they are conducting the activity strictly in conformity with the provisions of law and environmental laws in this regard, after obtaining necessary permission and license. The prawn culture activities conducted by the respondents are subject matter of periodical checking by the Fisheries Department. In case of any violation, there is always a threat of cancellation by the Competent Authority. He was strictly adhering to the conditions imposed and he was not causing any pollution as alleged. The report of the Expert Committee appointed by the Tribunal also fortifies the case of the 7th Respondent. The Competent authority has further stated all the unauthorized aqua ponds have been demolished and electricity connection disconnected. The 7th Respondent's aqua pond was not demolished and it is not found in the list of the unauthorized aquaculture ponds whose service connections were disconnected. That shows that his activity is perfectly legal. From the aquaculture ponds of the respondents where the agricultural activities are being conducted are at the distance of more than 3 Kms. Even as per the report filed before this Tribunal, there was no mention of any contamination or damage to agricultural crops due to draining canal viz., Pala Madugu Vagu. The nature of canal is that it starts from Pittavanapalli village and joins Royalavagu just almost at the extreme downstream before it joins Pulicat Lake and the sea. So, there was no cause or any apprehension for any effluent affecting the agricultural activities or the ground water or the drinking water or any of the villages nearby. The very nature of the canal is only a draining canal and hence, the only source for the prawn culture water to be released and it is not likely to affect the agricultural activities. So, there was no merit in the application and they prayed for dismissal of the application.
17. The 18th respondent filed common counter on her behalf and on behalf of the 39th respondent contending that she is conducting the prawn culture activity in Survey Nos.50-2, 68-2, 68-3, 69-1, 70-3, 72-2, 79-4, 78, 79-3 as per the license granted at Pittivanapalli village from the year 2008-2009 onwards, after obtaining necessary permission and license from the Aquaculture Authority. They were strictly following the guidelines in the Page 33 of 140 regulations and notification. She was not exploiting any groundwater using any bore well and the source of water for the purposes of the prawn culture is a creek called Kandaleru creek. On all other aspects, she had reiterated the contentions raised by the 7th respondent in their counter statement. The name of the respondent finds place at Serial No. 54, 70, 72, 79 and 81 in the report and it was specifically mentioned that it was an authorized activity. Sl. No. 69 is Pari Vijayakumar who is none other than the son of the 18th respondent and he was also conducting the prawn culture along with the 18th respondent and not independently conducting as alleged. He was not a owner of the land, but in fact, 18th respondent is the owner of the land and also Survey No. 68/2 and 68/3. This area is also covered by the license granted. The 39th respondent shown and her son Pari Vijayakumar are one and the same person and they have been differently shown in the application. Serial No. 82 shown as Pari Ramanaiah is none other than her husband and he was shown as person conducting prawn culture in Survey No. 80/7, 8, 9, 10 and the same was unauthorized. It was factually incorrect. There was no prawn culture conducted in Survey No. 80/7, 80/10 as alleged in the report and it is being done in the lands for which license was already been granted in Survey Nos. 80/8 and 9. No prawn culture is being conducted in survey No.80/7 and 80/10. In respect of Survey No.80/8 and 9, the 18th Respondent had applied for the license to the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and the grant of license has also been recommended by the Tahsildar and the District Level Committee which is the competent authority. Only upon the approval of the Fisheries Department, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority will grant the license. Pending the same, the corona pandemic affected the entire Government operation. So, the final step of grant of license could not be done. As per the Act, if no order was passed, within 15 days on the submission of application, there is deeming provision of grant of approval. Pending the application for approval / license, the A.P. Government enacted Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act and published the same in the gazette on 17.06.2020 and it came into effect from that date. As per the said enactment any existing licensee is entitled to continue the business of Aquaculture and it is not necessary to apply for any license afresh under Page 34 of 140 Section 23 of the said enactment and the only condition is it has to be endorsed. Since the application for license is pending with the authority, without passing any orders, in respect of Survey No. 80/8 and 80/9, it will have to be deemed to have been granted and her activity will have to be treated as legal. The name of her husband has to be deleted from the report, as he has no connection with the property. So, she prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
18. The 19th respondent filed common counter contending that she was the absolute owner of property comprised in Survey No. 21/4, 17/2A, 15/4D 12/5, 12/4 and 12/3 of Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District. She was desirous of doing prawn culture in hers property and accordingly applied for license to the Competent Authority i.e. Coastal Aquaculture Authority under the provisions of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and she was granted license vide license dated 07.01.2019 for a period of 5 years. She had undertaken the prawn culture strictly in accordance with the Rules and Regulations imposed by the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and there was no complaint from any quarters during the periodical check from the Competent Authorities under the Enactment. The applicant had filed the application without considering the actual facts and the persons who have obtained the license under the Act. Since based on the allegations made by the applicant and others, when certain action was taken for disconnection of electricity and dispossession of prawn culture farm, for urgency, she had approached the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and obtained an interim order directing the official respondents to consider the objections of the Petitioner therein and it was filed only for a stop gap arrangement and comprehensive adjudication has to be done by the Tribunal only. She had also more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the respondents Nos.17 & 18. The report of the Joint Committee will go to show that the aqua pond of this respondent was not shown as one demolished or electricity connection disconnected. So, she prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
Page 35 of 14019. The 20th respondent filed common counter denying the allegations made in the application as far as it relates to her. It is contended that she is the absolute owner of the property at Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District situated comprised in Survey Nos.27/P2, 23/1, 21/5, 20/1, 18/2A2, 17/2B, 16/2A, 13/3 and 11/1A. She applied for the licence to the Aquaculture Authority under the said Act and she was granted license dated 22.11.2017 and 01.11.2019 and they were still in force till date. She was conducting prawn culture strictly in accordance with the conditions imposed. The agricultural lands are situated at the distance more than 500 meters from the aquaculture ponds and there was no probability, even remote possibility of pollution being caused. The saline water from the ponds is let out into the draining channel viz., Palamadugu which joins the Royalavagu downstream and meets Buckingham canal and the sea. They are not causing any pollution. In the expert committee report, the Serial Numbers shown as Nos. 8,10,13,14,16,18,19, 20,24 and 27 are related to this respondent. The only entry No. 13, this Respondent's name was shown and in all the other entries, the Respondent's representatives were shown as unauthorized person and they were doing under her on the basis of the deemed license granted. Only with respect to Sl. No.8, 10, 13, it was mentioned that the aquaculture ponds are unauthorized. As a matter of fact, in the year 2020, the Andhra Pradesh Government Enacted Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 was notified with effect from 17.06.2020, wherein under Section 22 of the said Act, if any existing Aquaculture farmers do not have a license or registered with Coastal Aquaculture Authority as on the appointed date, they shall apply for license in the prescribed format within 4 months. Accordingly, they have applied vide application dated 14.06.2020 and 14.06.2021 and the same is pending. As per Section 22 (7) of the said enactment, if license is not issued within 15 days from the date of application, the license shall be deemed to be issued. The respondents ponds were already in existence from the years 2017 & 2019 and applied under the said enactment and in view of the deeming provision contained in Sec 22 (7), Respondent is deemed to have been granted license and it cannot be said to be an unauthorized aquaculture farm. It was also mentioned that when notices Page 36 of 140 were issued and the classifications made in the report was not correct as regards the respondent is concerned. The respondent filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court challenging the interim order passed by the National Green Tribunal dated 10.06.2020 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the application. When the electricity disconnection was ordered, they approached the Hon'ble High Court a temporary measure by filing Writ Petition and the Hon'ble High Court has granted interim order directing the respondents to consider the objections of the writ petitioner/this respondent and it was filed only as a stop gap arrangement to get immediate relief and the substantial issue will have to be considered by the Tribunal. She had also more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the other respondents viz., Respondents Nos.7, 18 and 39 and prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
20. The 21st respondent filed common counter denying the most of the allegations made in the application. It is contended that he is the absolute owner of the property at Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District comprised in Survey Nos. 27-P1, 23/2, 21/6,20.2, 16/2B, 17/2C, 13/2, 11/2, 18/2A1. He had applied for the license before the Aquaculture Authority and obtained license dated 22.11.2017 and 03.11.2019 and he was conducting the aquaculture activity strictly in accordance with the license granted. So, his pond is authorized and without making proper verification, the applicant had falsely implicated in the party array. In Entry Nos.14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 27 of the Expert Committee report, the name of the representative of this respondent was shown in other entries viz., No.8, 10, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 27, 22, 23 his name was shown as lessee but he is the owner of the property and license holders and others are not having any interest and they were only assisting him in the process. Only in respect of Sy. No. 8,10,13, 16,/2b, 13/2, 11/2, 20 alone, the report stated that as if the said Aquaculture ponds are unauthorized, but in fact, in view of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act notified with effect from 17.06.2020, as per Section 22, the existing Aquaculture Farmers who do not have license or registered with Page 37 of 140 the Aquaculture Authority as on the appointed date were permitted to apply within 4 months. Accordingly, an application dated 14.06.2021 was filed and it was pending and as per Section 22 (7) of the said enactment, if no orders have been passed, either accepting or rejecting the application and effective orders were not passed within 15 days, then it will deemed to have been issued. He was doing aquaculture activity from the year 2017 - 2019 on the basis of the license granted and he had also applied for license under the new enactment and in view of the deeming provision contained in the said enactment, he cannot be said to be an unauthorized aquaculture owner. On all other aspects, he had reiterated the contentions raised by the other party respondents who filed counter. So, he prayed for passing appropriate orders.
21. The 22nd respondent filed common counter denying most of the allegations made in the application. It is contended that he is the absolute owner of property comprised in Survey No. 15-4A, 21-1 of Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District and he applied for license for conducting prawn culture under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and he was granted with the license dated 22.11.2017 for a period of 5 years. He was undertaking the prawn culture strictly in accordance with the conditions. The agricultural lands are situated 500 meters away from the aquaculture farm and source of water is Upputeru. There was no possibility of pollution being caused to the water bodies. Though he also challenged the interim order passed by this Tribunal dated 10.06.2020 by filing Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same was dismissed. When he received notice from the District Collector threatening disconnection of electricity and dispossession of prawn culture farm, he approached the Hon'ble High by filing Writ Petition and the Hon'ble High Court has granted an interim order and directed the respondents to consider their objections and pass appropriate orders and it was only a stop gap arrangement and the comprehensive adjudication has to be made by this Tribunal. He had also reiterated the contentions raised by the other contesting party respondents. So, he prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
Page 38 of 14022. The 23rd respondent filed common counter denying the allegations made in the application. It is contended that she is the absolute owner of property comprised in Survey No. 15-4C, 21-3 of Padarthyvari Kandriga village, Chittamuru Mandalam, Nellore District. Since she wanted to engage in prawn culture, applied for license before the Competent Authority under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and she was granted license vide license dated 22.11.2017 for a period of 5 years. She was conducting the prawn culture strictly in accordance with the conditions mentioned. Her property is situated 500 meters away from the agricultural lands and the source of water is Upputeru and there was no possibility of pollution being caused on account of their activity. They were discharging the water from the prawn pond into the drain canal which ultimately reaches the sea and it is not used for any irrigation or drinking water purpose. She moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition against the interim order passed by the National Green Tribunal dated 10.06.2020 and the was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. When she received the notice from the District Collector on the basis of the orders passed by the Tribunal, she approached the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh by filing Writ Petition and the Hon'ble High Court has granted interim order directed the authorities to consider their objections and pass appropriate orders. She was conducting prawn culture from the year 2017 strictly adhering to the license granted. She had also more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the other contesting respondents and prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
23. The respondents Nos.11 & 25 also filed common counter denying most of the allegations made in the application. It is contended that they were not conducting any illegal activity as alleged and he was not letting any untreated waste or discharge into the river. Based on the recommendations of the High-Level Committee constituted by the District Collector, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District and after considering the objections from the public, aqua zones were approved for setting up Aquaculture Farms. He holds valid Certificates of Registration bearing nos. AP-II-2018 (19815) and AP-II-2018 (19813) issued by the Page 39 of 140 Coastal Aquaculture Authority, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, to run Aquaculture Farm. He was not running any illegal aquaculture farm as alleged and the application was filed against them without ascertaining the true facts. They also produced the certification of registration issued by Coastal Aquaculture Authority dated 07.01.2019 along with the counter statement. It is further contended that they have not committed any act of pollution as alleged. So, they prayed for dismissal of the application.
24. The respondents Nos.10, 28, 31 & 34 filed common counter statement in all these applications denying the allegations made. They also more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the Respondents Nos.11 & 25 and produced the certificate of registration of M/s. Manubolu Sailaja (R10& R31) issued by the Aquaculture Authority. They denied the allegation that they are discharging any untreated sewage or waste from the aqua farm into the water. No act of pollution was committed by them. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
25. The 2nd respondent filed common counter denying the allegations made in the application. It is contended that the aquaculture activity are not coming under the Consent purview of the Board. The aqua farmers need not obtain any permission from the Board. They need to obtain registration from the Fisheries Department & Coastal Aquaculture Authority depending upon the aqua farms location. Most of the aqua ponds did not obtain registration either from the Fisheries department or Coastal Aquaculture Authority. They more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the other official respondents in respect of the persons having registration and who are running the aquaculture without registration as detailed by them in their counter in respect of three villages mentioned in the application. The Royyalakaluva is a tributary of Swarnamukhi River and Puli kaluva is a Sub channel to Royyalakaluva which was designed to carry 150 Cusecs of water and irrigated 3,238 Acres of land. They are the main supply channels of the Mallam tank. Yetiggattukaluva takes off at the right of Pulikaluva, direct feeder channel to agricultural fields of Pittavanipalli, Padarthaveri Page 40 of 140 kandriga and Ranganathapuram in Chittamuru Mandal and Palamaduguvagu is an inundation channel that carries flood water during monsoon season. Royyalakaluva and Puli kaluva contain salinity due to the release of waste water from shrimp ponds and as such, the salinity in the Mallam tank also increased. The Aquaculture activity generates effluent / contaminated water due to the mixing of feed in it. But, it generates slightly contaminated effluent. In general, prawn is sensitive to the chemicals. If the aqua farms are highly contaminated with chemicals, the prawn could not grow in the tank. While carrying out aquaculture, some of the farmers use salt water with high TDS. Once they release the saltwater into the fresh water canals, there could be a chance to rise TDS in the fresh water body. If the water flows in the freshwater body is low, then there would not be much dilution, and the TDS of the freshwater body would increase. The Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture have to consider the activities of aquaculture in the State. The Fisheries Department, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh has conducted zoning process and categorized as aquaculture farm areas and only in those areas, such activities are permitted and they are not permitting all agricultural lands for this purpose. The Fisheries Department and Coastal Aquaculture Authority has to take appropriate action against those persons who are running the unit without obtaining necessary licence etc. They also given the details of the inspections conducted, and the report of the water analysis in respect of Pulikaluva, Etigattu Kaluva, Mallam Tank and certain points on 26.09.2019 and the water samples collected from Pulikaluva, Etigattu Kaluva, Mallam Tank and Pedakamanuvagu on 25.07.2020 were shown as follows:-
Point of Samples Parameters Value
collection
Puli Kaluva Near PH 7.85
EtigattuThumu, Total Suspended Solids(TSS) in 28
Chittamuru (M) mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids(TDS) in 4656
mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen Demand ( 50
COD) in mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen Demand( 12
BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in
mg/lit
Puli Kaluva Near PH 7.79
Page 41 of 140
Pittuvanipalli, Total Suspended Solids(TSS) in 31
Chittamuru (M) mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids(TDS) in 4875
mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen Demand 56
(COD) inmg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 15
(BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in
mg/lit
EtigattuKaluva, PH 7.60
PedharthivariKandr
iga, Chittamuru Total Suspended 35
(M) Solids (TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in 5832
mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 48
Demand (COD) in mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 10
(BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in
mg/lit
Mallam tank, Near PH 7.77
Pallemparthri
Junction, Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in 16
Jalapeddipalem mg/lit
Chittamuru (M), Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in 5122
mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen Demand 80
(COD) in mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 20
(BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in
mg/lit
Pedakamanuvagu, PH 7.76
Near
Pittuva Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in 18 nipalli, Chittamuru mg/lit (M) Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in 6728 mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 67 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 18 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit EtigattuKaluva, PHNearThagedamma temple,Ranganathapuram, 7.52 Chittamuru (M) Total Suspended Solids 84 (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in 10822 mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 56 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 15 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Point of Samples Parameters Value collection PedakamanuVagu, PH 7.31 near Pittuvanipalli Total Suspended Solids 14 (TSS) in mg/lit Page 42 of 140 Total DissolvedSolids 8810 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen 56 Demand (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 8.4 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @270C in mg/lit EtigattuKaluva, Near PH 7.18 Thagedamma temple, Total Suspended Solids 12 Ranganathapuram (TSS) in mg/lit Total DissolvedSolids 16976 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen 68 Demand (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 10.4 Demand(BOD) for 3 days@ 270C in mg/lit Aqua pond at Puli PH 6.69 Kaluva, Near Total Suspended Solids 16 Pittuvanipalli (V) (TSS) in mg/lit Total DissolvedSolids 7152 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen 44 Demand (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 6.2 Demand(BOD) for 3 days@ 270C in mg/lit Aqua pond at PH 6.67 EtigattuKaluva, Total Suspended Solids 10 PedhavarthivariKandri (TSS) in mg/lit ga (V) Total Dissolved Solids 4800 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 36 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 5.0 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Puli Kaluva, Near PH 7.10 EtigattuThumu, Total Suspended Solids 18 Chittamuru (M) (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 10530 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 60 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 9.0 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Puli Kaluva, Near PH 7.28 Pittuvanipalli, Total Suspended Solids Chittamuru (M) (TSS) in mg/lit 22 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in mg/lit 5680 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in mg/lit 52 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) for 3 days 7.8 @ 270C in mg/lit EtigattuKaluva, PH 7.15 PedhavarthivariKandri ga, Chittamuru (M) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in mg/lit 16 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in mg/lit 8124 Page 43 of 140 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in mg/lit 64 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) for 3 days 9.2 @ 270C in mg/lit Mallam tank Near PH 7.13 Pallemparthri Junction, Total Suspended Solids Jalapeddipalem, (TSS) in mg/lit 14 Chittamuru (M) Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in mg/lit 7200 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in mg/lit 48 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) for 3 days 7.0 @ 270C in mg/lit
26. The results indicates that there is a presence of saline water in fresh water bodies. They also reiterated the fact that they were part of the Joint Committee appointed and inspection conducted and the notices issued by the Fisheries Department to the unauthorized aqua farms which some of them were demolished. The extensive groundwater usage leads to the increase of salinity in the groundwater in the groundwater table and they need to obtain permission from the ground water department before digging a bore well in that area. It is for the Groundwater Department to conduct a study regarding the ground water depletion issue as alleged in the application. The Aquaculture requires saline water and the agricultural paddy fields require sweet water. The co-existence of both needs proper planning for fresh water & waste water management. The waste water discharge from the aquaculture shall not be allowed to let into the fresh water canals/tanks. There shall be a dedicated drain/ pipeline to discharge saline water from the aqua ponds to the Upputeru Kaluva/ Buckingham canal in case of allowing aquaculture in that area. The Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 deals with the license and penal provisions were provided against the aquaculture farms. Certain actions have been taken on the basis of the directions given by the Tribunal duly incorporating penal provisions on the un-authorized aqua farms.
27. The 4th respondent filed common counter contending that the Aquaculture Authority was set up in February, 1997 through a notification dated 06.02.1997 under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 in pursuance of the directives of the Hon'ble Page 44 of 140 Supreme Court relating to setting up of shrimp aquaculture farms mainly to regulate shrimp farming in coastal areas. The Aquaculture Authority has undertaken many activities so far to promote environment friendly improved shrimp farming in the coastal areas in the country including an Expert Consultation organized in August 2002 at Chennai, which recommended many crucial issues to be taken up by all concerned for development of shrimp farming in the country. However, the Government of India in the 56th year of Republic of India had enacted an Act (No.24 of 2005) to provide for an establishment of Coastal Aquaculture Authority for regulating the activities connected therein and the Authority was established on 22.12.2005. As per the provisions of the Act, all the existing farms shall be registered with Coastal Aquaculture Authority (CAA). They have reiterated certain provisions of the CAA Act in respect of the activities and how it is being regulated, how the license is being granted and how the site selection will have to be provided on the basis of the guidelines given for regulating Coastal Aquaculture issued under Chapter II of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Rules, 2005 and the necessity for protecting the livelihood of various coastal communities who are involved in such activity. They have given the details of the aqua culture farms having registration and details of the farms already registered as follows:-
Sl. No. Village Name No. of Farms Total Farm Area (ha) 1 Arurru 29 25.87 2 Athetipadu 1 0.86 3 Chittamur 9 18.89 4 Eswaravaka 10 17.14 5 Gangupalem 6 10.68 7 Kogili 56 43.65 8 Kothapalem 7 13.60 9 Mallam 5 7.72 10 Mukkidipalem 8 22.40 11 Padarthivarikandriga 10 12.38 12 Pallamparthi 15 40.07 13 Phothunayanpalle 6 10.31 14 Pittivanipalli 10 21.68 15 Ranganadhapuram 2 0.80 16 Vadlavanipalle 1 1.20 17 Yakasiri 1 0.60 18 Yelluru 27 105.79 Total 204 355.52
28. It is further contended that the Royyalavaugu creek covers around 20 Kms in the Chitamur Mandal and finally merges into Upputeru near the Raviguntapalem Village of Vakadu Mandal. The Upputeru and Page 45 of 140 Royyalavaugu creeks in and around Chittamur Mandal are historically known for high saline water due to constant tidal influx from Bay of Bengal and retention of saline water during summer. The Department of Fisheries have undertaken the process Aqua Zonation and accordingly, they have issued certain notifications which are reiterated by the Fisheries Department in their counter earlier. They also more or less reiterated the contentions raised by the Fisheries Department regarding the nature of agricultural lands and its fertility as alleged by the applicant etc. They also mentioned about the penal provision for violation of the Aquaculture Authority Act. They also given the procedure for grant of permission by the Fisheries Department on the basis of the notifications issued by the Government in this regard. They also mentioned about the status of the salinity on the basis of the data collected by the Agricultural Department, as reiterated by the Fisheries Department. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
29. The respondents Nos.8 & 12 filed common counter contending that they are the owners of the land having an extent of 5.76 Ha. in Survey No.1, 3- P, 9-A, 9-A3, 9-B, 9-C situated at Pittuvanipall Village, Chittamuru Mandal , SPSR Nellore District and they were conducting the Aquaculture Farms after obtaining permission from the Coastal Aqua Cultural Authority vide Registration No.AP-II 212 (15714) dated 12.10.2012 initially for a period of 5 years from the date of registration. Thereafter, they applied for renewal by application dated 26.09.2020 by paying requisite fees before the competent authorities and that was pending for consideration. They also enrolled the farms with Marine Products Export Development Authority (Ministry of Commerce & Industry), Govt of India vide Enrolment : No AP.10 17241. In furtherance of which, they have taken all precautionary measures, to see that there will be no inconvenience caused to the adjacent farmers and they have got an effluent treatment system which will treat the water before it is being discharged into the ponds. All necessary measures have been taken by them. They are not carrying on any aquaculture farm near to any water bodies as alleged. They are not conducting any illegal aqua farms and they are doing business strictly in accordance with the Page 46 of 140 provisions. They also approached the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the illegal disconnection order issued on the basis of the directions of this Tribunal by filing Writ Petition No.14232 of 2021 for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the authorities as illegal of trying to disconnect the electricity and demolishing the aquaculture farms and the Hon'ble Tribunal suspended the notice issued by the official respondents vide R.C. No. BWA dated 30/06/2021 and RC.No. 1053/D/2019 dated 04/07/2021 pending disposal of the writ petition No.14232 of 2021 and the interim order was passed as follows:-
"Having heard the submissions of the learned counsels and upon perusal of the material available on record, the respondents are directed to maintain status-quo in all respects with regard to the subject land mentioned in this writ petition."
Further, as per Order in I.A. No. 2/2021 filed in the Writ Petition praying for issuing a direction to the 7th Respondent therein not to disconnect the power supply pursuant to the notices issued vide D.No.803/2021 dated 09/07/2021 for Service Nos.120, 121, 146 of Pittuvanipalli Village, Chittamaru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District during the pendency of the Writ Petition and an interim order was passed directing the 7th respondent therein not to disconnect the power supply in respect of the service mentioned above. The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh disposed of the Writ Petition vide order dated 17.08.2021 with the following directions:- "...Learned Government Pleader submits that the notices were issued pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal and that basing on the explanation filed by the petitioner, appropriate decision would be taken. In the present case, petitioner has already submitted his explanation on 08.07.2021. Even though the petitioner contends that he has obtained registration certificate from the Costal Aquaculture Authority , there are other allegations, which are made in the impugned notices. Admittedly, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, he was asked to remove the aquaculture tanks in his own. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned proceedings dated 30.06.2021 and 04.07.2021 are treated as notices and opportunity is given to the petitioner to file additional explanation, if any, to the said notices, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After receipt of the additional explanations from the petitioner within the stipulated time, the Competent Authority is directed to deal with the same and take appropriate decision in the matter, as expeditiously as possible. Till the appropriate decision Page 47 of 140 is taken in the matter and communicated to the petitioner herein, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner's aquaculture farm / tank, which is mentioned in the impugned notices. If no reply is received within the time stipulated above, the respondents are at liberty to take action in accordance with law. As there is an interim direction pending writ petitiondirecting the 7th respondent not to disconnect the power supply pursuant to the notice in D.No.803 / 2021, dated 09.07.2021 for Service Nos.120, 121 and 146 of Pittivanipalli village, Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, the 7th 4 KVL, J WP No.14232 of 2021 respondent is directed not to disconnect the power supply to the subject tanks of the petitioner, till appropriate decision is taken by the Competent Authority. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed .....". They have not committed any illegality and they are strictly complying with the permissions granted. A similar notice was issued on 04.07.2021 without considering the permissions obtained from the competent authorities in respect of 3.22 Ha. of land in Survey No. 9A, A3, B, C of Pittivanupalli Village, Chittamuru Mandal which was mentioned in the report submitted by the 5th Respondent which was extracted in the order of the Tribunal dated 10.06.2021 as authorized. This Tribunal also directed that before taking coercive steps, they were directed to follow the procedure in accordance with law. After issuing notice, the respondents Nos.3, 6 and 7 were repeatedly approached and pressurized the respondent to demolish the farms voluntarily vide D.No. 803/2021 dated 09.07.2021 stating that the National Green Tribunal vide Orders dated 09.07.2021 directed them to disconnect the power supply. It is further contended that they are conducting the farms strictly in accordance with law and no illegality has been committed by them. So, they prayed for dismissal of the application, accepting their contentions.
30. When the matter came up for hearing on 26.02.2021, this Tribunal considered the report submitted by the Joint Committee dated Nil, e-filed on 26.02.2021 which reads as follows:-
"JOINT INSPECTION REPORT IN THE MATTER ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.114 to 122 of 2020 (SOUTH ZONE) FILED BY PANTRANGAM RAMASUBBAIAH ... xxx ... xxx ...
1) The sector of aqua plays an important role in economic development of the country by its potential in exports and nutrients addition to generation of employment.Page 48 of 140
The District of SPSR Nellore District is also blessed with coastal area. The share of brackish shrimp of the district to the GVA reached peaks during 2017-2018. It accounted for 84.11 per cent. But the average share of the brackish shrimp is not less than 80 percent.
2) The shrimp culture attracts not only more profits but also many legal issues. Some of the adjacent former to the brackish shrimp ponds filed a petition in the Hon ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai. The petitioners alleged some issues on the writ. They are
a) Pulikaluva and Royyalakaluva which is feeder channel to the Mallan tank are being contaminated due to release of contaminated waste water into drain from shrimp ponds.
b) With that effect of contaminated water, the agriculture fields of paddy crops are getting damaged and hence requested to take necessary steps on aqua cultivation.
3) In this connection, the adjacent farmers have raised said complaint in the Writ Petition before Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai has directed the District Collector, SPSR Nellore appropriate to appoint a joint committee comprising of (1) District Collector, Nellore District or a Senior Officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector or Sub-Division Magistrate to be deputed by him, (2) Joint Director of Fisheries Department, (3) Senior Officer from Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board to be designated by the Chairman, (4) Senior Officer from Coastal Aquaculture Authority and (5) a Professor from Acharya N.G. Ranga Agriculture University, Guntur to inspect, if there is any violation found.
Further, the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal has directed the committee to study the following things:
a) The environmental damage has been caused on account of unauthorized function of shrimp culture.
b) The illegal discharge of untreated effluents being done into water bodies from the units.
c) If so, the quality of affected water.
d) Unauthorized extraction of ground water for the purpose of shrimp cultivation.
e) Area as to whether it is critically over exploited or semi critical area.
f) Assess the environmental compensation and persons responsible for the damage.
g) Consider the loss of income caused on account of the illegal activity.
In pursuance of the proceedings of the District Collector, SPSR Nellore the Sub Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gudur has appointed a committee under his supervision, comprising of Deputy Inspector of Surveyor, Executive Engineer (Irrigation), Executive Engineer (Electrical), Assistant Director (Agriculture) Executive Engineer (Pollution Control Board as members of the committee and Assistant Director of Fisheries as convenor of the committee.
The committee physically inspected the area in question. During its inspection the Committee has observed certain things. They are
4) Unauthorized cultivation:
a) Agricultural fields have been converted into shrimp culture. This is illegal.
b) In Chittamur Mandal, 83.77% unauthorized shrimp cultivation is going on.
c) In Vakadu Mandal, 75.77% the unauthorized shrimp cultures occupied.
d) In Kota it is 94.09%
e) Overall unauthorized cultivation is 86.43%.
5. Government land encroachment:
Encroachment of Government land is a common phenomenon in all villages in question as detailed below:
6) Quality of water:
The quality of water depends mainly on PH value of the water. The value in sample varies.Page 49 of 140
a) PH ranges from 10000 - 16000.
Ec has positive correlation with TDS and negative with crop productivity. The permissible level of Ec is 750-2000 us/ cm.
b) Ec ranges 110-5466
c) TDS ranges 550-2800
7) Pollution:
The Royalkaluva is a tributary to Swarnamukhi River. Pulikaluva is a sub channel to Royyalakaluva. The Pulikaluva is designed to carry a discharge of 150 cusecs of water and irrigated 3238 acres of land. They are main supply channels of Mallam Tank. Yetigttukaluva takes off at right of Pulikaluva, direct feeder channel to agricultural fields of Pittivanipalli, Padarthaverikandriga and Ranganathpuram in Chittimur Mandal. Palamaduguvagu is an inundation channel which carries flood water during monsoon periods.
Royylakaluva and Pulikaluva are being polluted due to release of brackish waste water from shrimp ponds. Hence, the Mallam Tank is also contaminated water of Royyalakaluva, Pulikaluva which are feers of the tank.
The Chief Scientist and head of saline water scheme, AIRP opined out of 40 samples 52.5 percent samples are non-saline. 5% strongly saline and 5% very saline.
The committee has found the following points during its physical inspection in the aforesaid villages such as
1. Some of the farmers have converted their agricultural lands into aqua culture.
2. Some extent of assigned land was converted for aqua cultivation.
3. The brackish ground water is being used for farming of shrimp culture in all villages of three Mandals in the range of 10000 - 16000 lph.
4. There is 83.77% of unauthorized shrimp culture is found in Chittumur Mandal, it is 94.09 in Vakadu Mandal and it occupies 75.7% in Kota Mandal.
In aggregate it is 86.43%.
5. Absence of effluent treatment system facility to treat waste water in the shrimp farms.
6. Release of untreated brackish waste water into Pulikaluva and Royyalakaluva caused for water pollution in Mallam Tank which is designed to carry 150 cusecs and irrigate to 3738 acres.
7. Owing to water pollution TDS ranges 550-2400 PPM and EC ranges 1100 -- 5466 us/cm.
8. Increasing salinity and electricity conductivity due to increasing TDS diminishes agriculture productivity. The average productivity is about 25 quintals per hector. The quality of the product is average.
9. It is found that 56.2 hectors of Government land is encroached and farming brackish water shrimp culture in Chittamur Manda, it is 9.48 Ha. In Kota and 23.51 in Vakadu Mandal. In aggregate it is 89.19 Ha.
10. Lack of inspection by authorities concerned during the period of shrimp culture.
11. Absence of co-ordination among the departments concerned.
12. Most of the shrimp culture is doing on lease basis.
13. Unmatched electrical connections and unavailable electrical connections are found more in number.
8) Actions taken report:
On the representation which had been submitted in Spandana programmes in Chittamur Mandal. The Tahsildar, Chittamur inspected and submitted a report to the Sub Collector, Gudur. On the request of ryots of Mallam, the Sub Collector, Gudur, inspected on 07.02.2020 and instructed to remove ponds in assigned lands. On the instructions of the sub-Collector, the Tahsildar of Chittamur Mandal and his staff removed the illegal ponds in the assigned land. The Tahsildar and his staff removed the sluices which throw the Page 50 of 140 waste water into Royyalakaluva and Pulikaluva. The Electrical Department removed unauthorized connections.
The committee has observed during the inspection that some electrical connections are not matched with sanctioned survey numbers:
9) Recommendations:
1) The lessors should take necessary measures to convert the lands which are not fit for agriculture into shrimp ponds.
2) Only lands which are not fit for agriculture which was certified by the Agriculture Department should be allowed to convert into brackish water shrimp culture and for Aqua cultivation.
3) The Government of India as well as the Government of Andhra Pradesh is spending huge amount of money in form of subsidies. But the benefits are not reaching to the gross root level. Hence, the Government may establish a fish market yard like agricultural market yard that should take up marine business. The number of shrimp cultivation by owner is very small due to lack of investment. Hence, the benefits may be reached by credit linkage with fish market yard. The credit amount may be met from either its own funds which have been provided by the Government or banks on guaranty of fish market yard.
5) The mechanism may be established headed by not below the rank of Assistant Collector or Sub Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate with empowered to conduct surprise visits or inspection, levy huge penalties and demolition on illegal prawn ponds and demolition, if necessary and cancel the license of the illegal ponds.
6) The mechanism should consist of Senior Agricultural Scientist, Officers from the Board of Pollution and Control, Fisheries, Groundwater and Audit as members of the agency.
7) The lease amount may be fixed by the Government or the mechanism that should be not less than the loss of agricultural income due to the conversion of agricultural land into shrimp pond.
8) In order to avoid problems of ground water salinization, drawal of groundwater is strictly prohibited for shrimp aquaculture. It must be ensured that piezometers/groundwater monitoring bore wells preferably 4/ ha (along the periphery of the pond) are installed to monitor salinity ingress. In case of salinity ingress, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority should ensure immediate closure of the farms.
9) An underground pipe line may be constructed which may be convenient to drain the waste water freely. The drain should be connected to salt pond or Buckingham canal whichever is nearer to the ponds. The cost of constructing the drain will be collected from shrimp cultivators irrespective of owners of the land (OR)
10) A common drain system may be connected to a pond which the cost of construction has been shared between public and the owner of shrimp cultivators irrespective of owner ship of the land in the ratio of 25:75.
11) It is better to handover the maintenance of the drain system to the fish market yard if the yard has been established. In case of absence of the yard, the maintenance may be handed over to Irrigation Department. It may be inspected by the mechanism.
12) Take necessary measures to all high saline groundwater for shrimp farming because the saline water with high PH value is unfit for agricultural and drinking purposes. But, as such farm shall have pollution free or eco-friendly drain system.
13) Category-wise land utilization with survey numbers may be tagged with GPS to prevent encroachments of Government lands.
14) Necessary measures should be taken to reclaim the agricultural lands and the cost of reclaiming will be collected from the responsible shrimp cultivators,
15) The departments concerned may take necessary steps to quick disposal of the legal issues in the Hon'ble Courts by timely responding according to the directions of the Hon'ble Courts.
16) To include the Groundwater Department, Irrigation Department and Forest Department as members into the District Level Committee (DLC) where the application for approval of Aqua ponds is being scrutinized and finalized.
17) To disconnect the electrical connections this has been got unauthorizedly.
18) To demolish the Aqua ponds which have no approvals by duly following the procedure laid down under CAA Rules.
19) Institutionalization of Aqua cultivation in the said Mandals.
20) Minimum of 50-100 mtrs. distance may be maintained between the Aqua ponds and Agricultural fields.
21) Minimum of 300 mtrs distance may be maintained from the habitation containing more than 500 members to the Aqua ponds.
22) A committee consisting of different departments like Agriculture, Revenue, Electricity and Forest while issuing electrical connections for Aquaculture may be constituted for issuing No Objection Certificate.Page 51 of 140
10) Action to be taken immediately:
1) Demolish the illegal shrimp ponds, if any, one of the ponds has been missed while the action that had been taken.
2) To remove all illegal electrical connections and electrical polls.
3) Encroachments should be removed immediately.
4) Immediate steps to be taken for cultivation of paddy crops in the affected area."
31. Thereafter, this Tribunal had passed the following order:-
"....7. The report is only vague in nature. They have not given the number of such shrimp culture that is being carried out in that area and whether they are authorised or unauthorised, what is the nature of steps taken by them to remove the illegal shrimp farms. The report of the water analysis showed that there was contamination, but they have not mentioned the nature of action taken. It is not clear as to how many units have been closed, how many of them are having necessary permission under law and whether there is any violation of CRZ etc.,
8. They have also not suggested any remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of restoring the damage caused to the environment and also they have not assessed the environmental compensation as directed.
9. The Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board (APPCB) did not file any independent statement as to the nature of action taken by them in respect of the same.
10. We have received an e-mail said to have been sent by the Joint Director of Fisheries to the Government Pleader, representing the State of Andhra Pradesh requesting the Tribunal for time to file their reply statement. If the applicant, take steps to serve notice on the other respondents, then office is directed to send immediately, so as to ensure service on them.
11. The committee as well as official respondents are directed to file a detailed report showing the name of the person who are conducting such shrimp culture, how many of them are unauthorised, what is the nature of action taken against each unit and also to assess the environmental compensation and suggest the remedial measures for restoring the damage caused to the environment and submit a detailed report to this Tribunal.
12. The committee is also directed to assess the individual damage if any caused to the applicants on account of the alleged illegal activities of the party respondents and if so to assess the compensation individually depending upon the level of damage sustained by a particular applicant instead of giving a common finding that there was general damage caused and assessing compensation. They are also directed to show the distance between each unit from the properties of the applicant, so that the proximity of the unit which is likely to cause contamination can be made a yardstick for payment of compensation to the applicant. If there is any damage caused to the property on account of the alleged illegal activities of any of the respondents, this must be specifically mentioned in the report to be submitted by the committee and they must also suggest the remedial measures to rectify the same.
13. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) as well as the official respondents including the District Collector is directed to file independent statements showing the nature of action taken by them against such units which they are expected to exercise under the provisions of law dealing with the same.
14. The party respondents who entered appearance through counsel are also directed to submit their independent responses before the next hearing date."
32. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 10.06.2021, and on that date, this Tribunal had considered the report submitted by the Joint Committee signed by one of the member with date 07.06.2021, e-filed on 10.06.2021 and extracted in Para (8) of the order which reads as follows:-
Page 52 of 140 1Committee report on the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone vide items No. 4 to 12 in OA No.114 of 2020 to OA No.122 of 2020 Dt:26-2-2021 It is submitted that the Honble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai vide order OA No.114 of 2020 to OA No.122 of 2020 Dt:26-2-202 I had directed to submit detailed report on the following points.
1. The number of shrimp culture ie., being carried out the area and whether they are authorized / un authorized, what is the nature of steps taken by them ( Authorities ) to remove the illegal shrimp farms?
In reply to the above it is submitted that there 167 farmers cultivating shrimp farming in 289 aqua ponds in Pittivanipalli, Padarthivari ICandriga and Ranganathapuram Village of Chittamur Mandal as detailed below:
S. Authorized Unauthorized Total
Name of the No.of
N
Village Ponds
o No.of Extent in No.of Extent No.of Extent in
Farmers Ha Farmers in Ha Farmers Ha
1 Pittivanipalli 148 18 17.75 81 60.21 99 77.96
Padarthivari
2 43 11 11.74 17 15.87 28 27.61
kandriga
Ranganatha
3 98 03 07.29 37 63.88 40
puram
71.17
Total 289 32 36.78 135 139.96 167 176.74
The details of authorized and unauthorized shrimp farming are as detailed below:
Authorized and unauthorized shrimp farming In Pittivanipalli Village of Chittamur Mandal.
Whet
Exte Authoraize
S. Name of the her
Father Survey nt d or Action
No Address .Lease
Aqua farmer Name No m Unauthora taken
or
Ha ized
Own
Konduru
Konduru . To be
1 Village Unauthon
Baskar 3 0.95 Lease demolis
Vakadu zed
Mandal hed
Chintha Chinta To be
Reddy Reddy Muttembak Unauthori demolis
2 3 0.79 Lease
Parandhama Chenga a Vakadu zed hed
Reddy Reddy
Chinta To be
Chintha
Reddy Unauthori demolis
3 reddy Kota Vidyanagar 4-1,2 1.58 Lease
Chenga zed hed
reddy Kota
Reddy
Unauthori To be
Puchalapalli zed demolis
venkannap
4 Sudarshana Gopalrao 5-1,2,3 1.74 Lease hed
mma alem Kota
Page 53 of 140
2
Pittivanipal To be
Puchalapalli
li Unauthori demolis
5 Sudarshana Gopalrao 6 0.13 -
Chitt ur zed bed
mma
Mandal
Mali To be
Malli venkannap Unauthori
6 8-12
, 0.89 Lease demobs
Seenaiah Krishnaiah alem Kota zed
bed
Mani To be
Mali venkannap Un
7 9-P 1. 80 Lease demolis
Seenaiah Krishnaiah alem Kota Authorized
bed
Pittivanipal
Mani Mani li, 9A, A3,
8 3.22 Lease Authorized
seenaiah Krishnaiah Chittamur B, C
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Pith
li Unauthori demolis
9 Hanumanth Ramaiah 10 0.26 own
Chittamur zed bed
aiah
Mandal
To be
vidya
Devalayama Unauthori demolis
10 - nagar 11 0.33 Lease
Land zed bed
Kota
Mall Mali Muttembak
11 12 1.85 Lease Authorized Started
Seenaiah Krishnaiah a Vakadu
Kalluru
Manubolu Anandhaia
12 Vakadu 20-1,3 1.32 Lease Authorized NIL
Satheesh h
Mandal
Pittivanipal
Mall Malli li, To be
13 Unauthori
14-1,2 1.75 Lease demolis
Seenaiah Krishnaiah Chittamur zed
bed
Mandal
Siddigunta
Manubolu Manubolu
14 palem, 15 1.02 Own Authorized Nil
Sailaja Sateesh
Vakadu
Pittivanipal
Manubolu Peda It
15 17-1,2 0.65 Lease Authorized Nil
Venkaiah Pitchaiah Chittamur
Mandal
To be
16 Kaluva - Unauthori demolis
- 19 0.12 Lease
zed bed
To be
Kalluru
Manubolu Anandhaia Unauthori demolis
17 Vakadu 20-1,3 1.32 Lease
Satheesh h zed bed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
18 Rangaiah li 20-1A, Unauthori demolis
Eswaraiah 1.29 Lease
Chittamur 2B zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Krishna li Unauthori demolis
19 21 1. 47 Lease
reddy Chittamur zed bed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Teruvayi li 22- Unauthori demons
20 Srinivasulu 1.19 Lease
Tirupalu Chittamur 1A,2,3 zed bed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
li demolis
23-
Chittamur Unauthori hed
21 Rangaiah Eswaraiah 1,2,5,6, 2.03 Lease
Mandal zed
8,9
Page 54 of 140
3
To be
Pittivanipal 24_ demolis
P li Unauthori hed
22 1,2,3,4, 1.77 Lease
Chandraiah Chittamur zed
5,6
Mandal
To be
23 T.Seenaiah Unauthori demolis
25 1.03 Lease
zed hed
27-
Manubolu Peda Kota, Kota 1,2,3,4,
24 2.32 Own Authorized
Venkaiah Pitchaiah Mandal 5,6,7,8,
9
' Pittivanipal
Manubolu Anandhaia li
25 28-2 0.92 Lease NIL
Satheesh h Chittamur Authorized
Mandal
Pittivanipal
Manubolu Anandhaia li
26 28-1 1.06 Lease Authorized
Satheesh h Chittamur
Mandal
Siddigunta 29_ To be
27 Muni Baskar Unauthori
0.95 Lease demolis
Palem 1,2,4,5 zed
Vakadu hed
To be
Kalluru Kalluru
Sesha Unauthori demolis
28 Vakadu 30-2A 1.52 Lease
Prabakar Reddy zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
li Unauthori demolis
29 P.Baskar Chengaiah chiu ur 30-2B 0.36 own
zed hed
Mandal
To be
venkannap 31-
Mani Unauthori demolis
30 akm Kota 5A,5B,6 0.74 Lease
Seenaiah zed hed
Mandal A,6B
31 T.Seenaiah 13-
- 0.51 Lease Authorized
1,2,7
Pittivanipal 32_
Kalluru Sesha li To be
32 1346
,,,, 0 .98 Unauthori
Prabakar Lease demolis
Reddy Chittamur zed
7 hed
Mandal
Kalluru Kalluru
Sesha
33 Vakadu 32-5 0.23 Lease Authorized
Prabakar Reddy
Mandal
To be
Siva kumar Allipuram 33- Unauthori demobs
34 099
. Lease
reddy Nellore 1A,132 zed hed
Pittivanipal To be
Nunjala li Unauthori demolis
35 Rajaiah 33-1C 0.98 Lease
Mac hu Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Nunjala li Unauthori demolis
36 Rajaiah 34 0.16 Lease
Madhu Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
li demolis
Manubolu 36-
Anandhaia Chittamur Unauthori hed
37 12,1D,1 1.21 Lease
Satheesh h Mandal zed
E
Page 55 of 140
4
Pittivanipal To be
li demolis
Teruvayi Unauthori
38 Srinivasulu Chittamur 36-1A 0.41 Lease hed
Tirupalu zed
Mandal
To be
demobs
hed
39 T.Seenaiah Unauthori
37 0.32 Lease
zed
38- To be
1,1A,2, demolis
40 T.Seenaiah - Unauthori
3,3A,4, 2.40 Lease hed
zed
4A,5,6,
6A
To be
kota
41 Sai Reddy - Kota Unauthori demolis
39-2,4A 0.45 Lease
mandal zed hed
To be
42 T.Seenaiah 39- Unauthori demolis
- 0.85 Lease
4,4B1 zed hed
43 Sai Reddy - Kota Kota
39-1 1.09 Lease Authorized
Mandal
To be
Manubolu Mallam
44 Anandhaia Unauthori demolis
Satheesh Chittamur 40 0.06 Lease
h zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Manubolu Ananclhala li Enchr
45 41 Unauthori demons
Satheesh h 0. 73 oach
Chittamur zed hed
Mandal ment
Singanalth To be
Rama Enchr
46 Jaya Balaiah uru Unauthori demolis
41 0.83 oach
kistaiah D.V.Sathra zed hed
m ment
Pittivanipal To be
Nunjala li Enchr
47 Rajaiah 41 Unauthori demolis
Madhu 0.56 oach
Chittamur zed hed
ment
Mandal
Manubolu Pittivanipal To be
Enchr
48 Ii Unauthori demolis
Venkateswar Papaiah 41 0.94 oach
lu Chittamur zed hed
ment
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Enchr
49 Chiranjeevi li Unauthori demolis
Narasaiah 41 0.68 oach
Chittamur zed bed
merit
Mandal
To be
Beedu Enchr
50 - - Unauthori demolis
(Kalava) 41 022
. oach
h
zed hed
ment
Pittivanipal To be
Teruvayi Enchr
51 li Unauthori demolis
Venkataiah 41 0.57 oath
Chandraiah Chittamur zed hed
merit
Mandal
To be
52 Mani Malli venkannapa Unauoriz
th demolish
Seenaiah 1Crishnalah lem Kota 13 0.66 Lease
ed ed.
Page 56 of 140
5
Kalluru To be
Wks du demolis
Kalluru Unauthori
53 Mandal 49-1,2 0.85 Lease hed
Sesha reddy zed
Parri Mallam,
54 Koteswaram Ramanaiah Chittamur 50-1 0.43 Own Authorized
ma Mandal
• To be
Pittivanipal demolis
Teruvayi li Unauthori hed
55 Venkataiah 50-2A 0.13 own
Marti Chittamur zed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Teruvayi 50-2B,
56 li Unauthori demolis
Venkataiah 1A,1B,1 0.19 own
Chandraiah Chittamur zed hed
C
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Nunjala 50-
57 li Unauthori demolis
Rajaiah 1,11,5, 0.12 Lease
Madhu Chittamur zed hed
9
Mandal
To be
Enchr
58 kaluva - - 59 Unauthori demobs
0.12 oath
zed hed
merit
Pittivanipal 60- To be
Teruvayi li 1,10,10 Unauthori demolis
59 Srinivasulu 1.21 Lease
Tirupalu Chittamur A,4A,4 zed hed
Mandal C,7
Duvvuru To be
Mallam
60 Dayakar Chittamur 61 0.75 Unauthori demolis
Lease
Reddy Mandal zed hed
Duvvuru To be
Malian Enchr
61 Dayakar Chittamur 62 Unauthori demolis
0.08 oath
Reddy Mandal z,ed hed
men
Kalluru To be
Kalluru
62 Prabakar Sesha Unauthori demolis
Vakadu 63-2 0.40 Lease
reddy Reddy zed bed
Mandal
Duvvuru To be
Malian
63 Dayalcar Chittamur 63-2 Unauthori demolis
0.74 Lease
Reddy Mandal zed hed
Duvvuru To be
Malian Enchr
64 Madhu Chittamur 64 Unauthori demolis
0.05 oach
Reddy Mandal zed hed
merit
Duvvuru Mallam
65 Madhu Chittamur 65 1.43 Lease Authorized
Reddy Mandal
Vidya
Krishna Nagar To be
66 Unauthori
reddy 66 1.09 Lease demolis
Kota zed
Mandal hed
To be
67 Mallikatjun 0.34 Unauthoriz demolish
66 Lease
6 ed ed
Beedu ( No Unauthori To be
68 - 67 0.10 Lease demolished
Culture) zed
Page 57 of 140
6
To be
Mallam
Parri 68- Unauthori demolis
69 Ramanaiah Chittamur 0.29 Lease
Vijayakumar 14 zed hed
Mandal
Path Mallam,
70 Koteswaram Ramanaiah Chittamur 68-2 0.56 Own Authorized
ma Mandal
Pittivanipal
Kapuluru h,
71 Sundaraiah 69-3 0.49 Own Authorized
Varalakshmi Chittamur
Mandal
Path Mallam,
72 Koteswaram Ramanaiah Chittamur 69-1 0.28 Own Authorized
ma Mandal
Pittivanipal 70- To be
Teruvayi h 1,3A,3B Unauthori demolis
73 Srinivasulu 0.85 Own
Tirupalu Chittamur ,3D,3E, zed hed
Mandal 3F
Pittivanipal To be
Teruvayi li Unauthori demolis
74 Srinivasulu 71-1,2 0.18 Lease
Le
Tirupalu Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Pitti
Parandham Ii Unauthori demolis
75 Chandramm 73 0.27 Own
aiah Chittamur zed hed
a
Mandal
To be
Beedu ( No Unauthori demolis
76 - 75 0.30 Lease
Culture) zed hed
To be
Beedu ( No Unauthori demolis
77 - 75 0.18 Lease
Culture) zed hed
To be
Enchr
78 1Caluva - Unauthori demobs
- 76 0.45 oach
zed hed
ment
Path Malian,
79 Koteswaram Ramanaiah Chittamur 78-1,2 0.26 Own Authorized
ma Mandal
Prabhakar kalluru To be
Sesha Unauthori
80 Vakadu 78 1.77 Lease demolis
Reddy Reddy zed
Mandal hed
Pan-i Mallam,
81 Koteswaram 79-
Ramanaiah Chittamur 0.75 Own Authorized
3,4,5
ma Mandal
To be
Mallam 80-
Path Subbarama Unauthori demolis
82 Chittamur 7,8,9,1 1.07 Own
Ramanaiah iah zed hed
Mandal 0
To be
94-
Geetha Unauthori demolis
83 -1,3,4,7, 1.88 Lease
reddy zed hed
8
To be
Kalluru 95-
Kalluru Unauthori demolis
84 Vakadu 3,4,5A, 0.67 Lease
Mallikarjun zed hed
Mandal 6
To be
Geetha Unauthori demolish
85 - 105-5 0.17 Lease
reddy zed ed
Page 58 of 140
7
Chittamur To be
86 Allipudi Babu Village 100 0.06 Lease Unauthori demolis
Babu Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Chittamur To be
Enchr
87 Allipudi
Babu Babu Village 101 0.69 oach Unauthori demobs
Chittamur merit zed hed
Mandal
Chittamur To be
Village demolis
88 Allipudi Babu Chittamur 103- 0.47 Lease Unauthori
hed
Babu 1,2A zed
Mandal
To be
89 Geetha - 104- 0.38 Lease Unauthori demolis
reddy 1B,2A zed hed
To be
90 Geetha - 112,11 1.13 Lease Unauthori demolis
reddy 2-2 zed bed
Pittivanipal To be
91 Teruvayi Mani li
1-1 1.01 Own Unauthori demolis
Bujjamma Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
92 Nunjala Nunjala li 1-1A 0.40 Own Unauthori demolis
Sumathi Madhu Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
Pittivanipal To be
Malli li Unauthori demolis
93 Guravaiah 1-3 0.50 Own
Chittamur zed hed
Mandal
' To be
94 Beedu ( No - - 1 1.14 Own Unauthori demolis
Culture) zed hed
Palli palem To be
Pakam Unauthori demolis
95 Chengaiah Vakadu 1-1 0.61 Own
Mandal zed hed
To be
Muttembak
96 Venkatasub a Vakadu 1-1 0.40 Own Unauthori demolis
baiah zed hed
Mandal
Muttembak To be
Pandi Chenga Unauthori demolis
97 Kotaiah a Vakadu 1-1 0.40 Own
Reddy zed hed
Mandal
Putta To be
98 Subramanya Kasthuraia Muttembak Unauthori demolis
h a Vakadu 1-1 0.40 Own
m Mandal zed hed
To be
Kalluru
99 Kalluru Vakadu 45-1 0.40 Lease Unauthori demolis
Sesha reddy zed hed
Mandal
Page 59 of 140
8
Authorized and Un Authorized shrimp farming in Padarthivarikandriga village of Chittamur Mandal:
Authoraiz Whether Presen Name of the Father Surve Extent ed or S.No Address Lease or Aqua farmer Name y No in Ha 0 Unauthor Status sized Vidya T be Konduru Pattabirami Nagar Unauthor demoli 13,4 1.64 Lease Krishna reddy Reddy Kota ized shed Mandal Vidya To be Nagar demoli Konduru Pattabirami Kota Unauthor shed 2 5-2 0.40 Lease Krishna reddy Reddy Mandal ized Vidya T be Konduru Pattabirami Nagar Unauthor demob.
3 5-3 0.61 Lease
Krishna reddy Reddy Kota ized shed
Mandal
Vidya To be
Konduru Pattabirami Nagar Unauthor demoli
4 5- IA 0.71 Lease
Krishna reddy Reddy Kota ized shed
Mandal
To be
Beedu (No Unauthor demoli
56 0.97 -
Culture) ized shed
To be
Beedu (No Unauthor demoli
6 - 8 1.21
Culture) ized shed
To be
Beedu (No Unauthor demoli
7- 10 0.19
Culture) ized shed
To be
11-
Vijayawad Unauthor demoli
8 Mohan Kumar 1A,11 0.71 Lease
a ized shed
-2
Vijayawad 12-
9 Mohan Kumar 0.68 Lease Authorize NIL
a 3,4,5
d
13- To be
Vijayawad 3,2,5, Unauthor demoli
10 Mohan Kumar 0.94 Lease
a ized
1A shed
Authorize
Vijayawad
ijayawad
11 Mohan Kumar 0.15 Lease d NIL
a 2,3
15- Authorize
Vijayawad
12 Mohan Kumar 4D, 2.53 Lease d ML
a
15-6
Parwath Reddy Mallara To be
Naray ana Unauthor
13 Venkataramana Chittamur 2A,16 0.70 Own demoli
Reddy ized
Reddy Mandal -23 shed
Venkanna
Valipi palem Authorize
14 Valipi Seenaiah aiah 0.85 Lease NIL
Ank Kota 2C,2B d
Mandal
valini Venkannap Demoli
Unauthor
15 Valipi Seenaiah arah alem Kota 0.99 Lease
Ank Mandal 2B1 ized shed
Page 60 of 140
9
Venkanna
Valipi 18-
16 palem Authorize
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 2A,2A 0.25 Lease
Kota d
2
Mandal
Venkanna
Valipi palem Unauthor Demoli
17 Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 19 0 .94 Lease
Kota ized shed
Mandal
Venkanna
Valipi palem 20- Authorize
18 Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 1.19 Lease
Kota 1 ,2 d
Mandal
Venkanna
Valipi palem 21- Authorize
19 Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 0 .75 Lease
Kota5,6 d
Mandal
Venkanna
20 Valipi palem Unauthor Demoli
Valipi Seenaiah Ankajah 21 0.93 Lease
Kota ized shed
Mandal
Venkanna
22-
21 Valipi palem Unauthor Demoli
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 1,2,3, 1.13 Lease
Kota ized shed
4,5
Mandal
Venkanna
22 Valipi palem Authorize
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 23-2 0.72 Lease
Kota d
Mandal
Parvathareddy Mallam,
Narayana Authorize
23 Venkata Chi ur 23-2 0.61 Own
Reddy d
Krishnareddy Mandal
Venkanna
Valipi palem 23_1 Authorize
24 Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 1.12 Lease
Kota d
Mandal
Venkanna
25 Valipi palem Unauthor Demob.
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 24 0.36 Lease
Kota ized shed
Mandal
Venkanna Lease
Valipi palem Unauthor Demob.
26 Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 25 0.08
Kota ized shed
Mandal
Venkanna Lease
27 Valipi palem 27- Authorize
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah 1.01
Kota P1,P2 d
Mandal
Venkanna 27- Lease
28 Valipi palem 1,3,4, 3.35 Unauthor Demob.
Valipi Seenaiah Ankaiah
Kota 5,6,8, ized shed
Mandal 9
Authorized and Unauthorized shrimp farming in Ranganadhapuram village of
Chittamur ?Janda!
Whet
Authora
S. Name of the her Presen
Surv Extent ized or
Father Name Address Lease t
No Aqua fanner ey No in Ha Unauth
or Status
oraired
Own
Vidya To be
Marri Siva Balakrishana Nagar 78- Unauth demoli
1 4.35 Lease
Reddy Reddy Kota 1,2 orizedshed
mandal
Page 61 of 140
10
Vidya To be
Math Siva Balakrishana Nagar Unauth demoli
2 79-B 0.49 Lease
Reddy Reddy Kota orized shed
mandal
Vidya To be
Nag
Nagar
Math Siva Balakrishana 81- Unauth demoli
3 Kota 1.21 Lease
Reddy Reddy 3,4 orized shed
Mandal
Vidya To be
Math Siva Balakrishana Nagar 79- Unauth demoli
4 0.78 Lease
Reddy Reddy Kota 1,2 orized shed
mandal
Mallam To be
Nalajam Muni Chittam Unauth demob.
5 79 0.43 Own
Manjula Kistaiah Ur orized shed
Mandal
Mallam To be
Nalajam Chittam Unauth demoli
6 Mallikarjuna 79 0.30 Own
Syamala ur orized shed
Mandal
Mallam To be
Poluru Chittam Unauth demoli
7 79 0.40 Lease
Buji amma ur orized shed
Mandal
Vidya To be
8 Pulasa Kotaiah Nagar Unauth demoli
100 3.79 Lease
Kota orized shed
mandal
Vidya To be
9 Nagar Unauth demoli
Pulasa Kotaiah 80 1.42 Lease
Kota orized shed
mandal
Mallam To be
10 Chittam Unauth demoli
Ramanaiah 91 4.10 Own
ur orized shed
Mandal
Mallam To be
11 Chittam Unauth demob.
Ramanaiah 97 1.56 Lease
ur orized shed
Mandal
Vidya To be
Sivalanki Nagar Unauth demoli
12 97 8.10 Own
Sudhakar Kota orized shed
mandal
To be
13 Balaji Unauth demob.
Kota 90 1.56 Own
orized shed
To be
14 Unauth demoli
Balaji Kota 92 0.49 Lease
orized shed
Vidya To be
Gudur Subba Nagar Unauth demoli
15 92 2.39 Lease
rao Kota orized shed
mandal
Vidya To be
Gudur Subba Nagar 89- Unauth demoli
16 3.11 Lease
rao Kota 2,3,4 orized shed
mandal
Page 62 of 140
11
To be
17 Gopala Krishna Kota 89-1 0.40 Unauth demoli
Own
orized shed
To be
18 Gopala Krishna 82- Unauth demoli
Kota 1.52 Lease
1,2 orized shed
Vidya To be
Gudur Subba Nagar Unauth demoli
19 88 3.66 Lease .
rao Kota orized shed
mandal
To be
Pumamalli demoli
20 Venkatasubbaia Kota Unauth shed
87 1.99 Lease .
h orized
To be
21 Beedu Unauth demoli
93 0.34 Lease .
orized shed
Mallam To be
Hanumantha Chittam Unauth demoli
22 Seshu Reddy 111 0.95 Own
rami Reddy ur orized shed
Mandal
Mallam To be
Hanumantha Chittam 107- Unauth demoli
23 Seshu Reddy 2.31 Own
rami Reddy Ur 1,2 orized shed
Mandal
Mallam To be
Hanumantha Chittam Unauth demob.
24 Seshu Reddy 108 0.28 Own
rami Reddy ur orized shed
Mandal
Venkann To be
Valipi apalem 10,10 Unauth demoli
25 Valipi Seenaiah 0.66 Lease
Ankaiah Kota -2 orized shed
mandal
Venkann To be
Valipi apalem Unauth demoli
26 Valipi Seenaiah 9-2,3 1.01 Lease .
Ankaiah Kota orized shed
mandal
Venkann To be
Valipi apalem 11- Unauth demoli
27 Valipi Seenaiah Kota 1 40 Lease
Ankaiah 1,2,3 ' orized shed
mandal
Venkann To be
28 Valipi apakm Unauth demoli
Valipi Seenaiah 12 1.04 Lease
Ankaiah Kota orized shed
mandal
Venkann To be
Valii
p Unauth demoli
29 Valipi Seenaiah aPalem 7 0.53 Lease
Ankaiah Kota orized shed
mandal
Venkann To be
Valipi apalem 6- Unauth demoli
30 Valipi Seenaiah 0.18 Lease .
Ankaiah Kota 1,3,7 ori
zed shed
mandal
To be
Bala Krishna Unauth demoli
31 - 84 0.40 Lease .
Reddy orized shed
Page 63 of 140
12
Unautho To be
32 M.Ravana Reddy 84 0.76 Lease demons
rized
hed
Maram Reddy
Narayana Naidupet Authori NIL
33 Chiranjeevi 84-1 3.64 Ovvn
Reddy a zed
reddy
Kami Reddy Jayarami Naidupet 84- Authori
34 1.82 Own NIL
ICasthur reddy Reddy a 1A zed
84-
Kann reddy Jayarami Naidupet 1A, Authori NIL
35 1.82 Own
Chandra Reddy Reddy a 1P-2, zed
2-2
To be
36 Purnamalli Unautho demons
Venkatasubbaiah K
Kota 85 257
. Own
rized hed
To be
Bala Krishna 83- Unauth demoli
37 - 1.72 Lease
Reddy 1,2,4 orized shed
To be
38 Purnamalli Unautho demolis
Venkatasubbaiah Kota 86 3.38 Lease
rized hed
To be
Maram Reddy Narayana Naidupet Unautho demolis
39 85 3.17 0
Chiranjeevi reddy Reddy a rized hed
Venkann To be
Valipi
apalem Unauth demoli
40 Valipi Seenaiah 1-1 1.11 Lease
Ankaiah
Kota orized shed
mandal
In the above unauthorized aqua ponds, the ponds under the lease of Sri Valipi Sreenivasulu who alienated Government land from assignees for an extent of Ac.12.17 in Padarthivari Kandriga Village as detailed below and same were demolished on 05-06-2020.
Name of the Name of the
Sy.No Extent
assignee alienee
19 1.36 Smt Bandi
27-9 1.40 Polatruna
Smt Mekala
27-6 1.40
Suneetha
Scat Kanuru
27-8 1.40
Jayamma
Sri Valipi
Smt Kanuru
27-5 1.40 Sreenivasulu
Kameswaramrna
Smt Kanuru
18-2B2 1.43
Chenchamma
19 0.95
Smt Satheti
27-7 1.40
Santhi
29-2 1.43
TOTAL 12.17
Page 64 of 140
13
Regarding the action on the remaining un demolished unauthorized ponds, it is submitted that Coastal Aqua Culture Authority is authorized for initiating action as per CAA Act, 2005. The Hon'ble National Green Tribunal may kindly be direct the concerned Coastal Aqua culture Authority for taking action on the unauthorized ponds.
The report of the water analysis shown that there was contamination, but it was not mentioned the nature of action taken on it. It is also not clear as to how many units have been closed, how many of them are having necessary permission under law and whether there is any violation of CRZ etc., The A.P. Pollution Control Board collected water samples from Puli Kaluva, EfigattuKaluva, Mallam tank and PedakamanuVagu on 26.09.2019. As per the analysis reports, the TDS values are in the range of 4656- 10,822 mg/lit; COD values are arranged of 48-80 mg/lit, and BOD values are in the range of 10-20 mg/lit.
Water samples were collected from Puli Kaluva, EtigattuKaluva, MaIlam tank 8sPedaKamanuvagu on 25.07.2020. As per the analysis reports, the TDS values are in the range of 4800 - 16,976mg/lit; COD values are in the range of 52-68 mg/lit and BOD values are in the range of 5-10.4 mg/lit.
The results indicate that there is a presence of saline water in freshwater bodies. The aquaculture activity does not come under the Consent purview of the APPCB. The aqua farmers need not obtain any permission from the APPCB. They need to obtain registration from the Fisheries Department & Coastal Aqua Culture Authority depending upon the aqua farm location.
Not suggested any remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of residing the damage caused to the environment and also they have not assessed the environmental compensation as directed.
It is submitted that the aquaculture requires saline water 8v the agricultural paddy fields require sweet water. The coexistence of both needs proper planning for freshwater 86 wastewater management. The wastewater discharge from the aquaculture shall not be allowed into the freshwater canals/tanks. There shall be a dedicated drain/ pipeline to discharge saline water from the aqua ponds to the UpputeruKaluva/ Buckingham canal in case of allowing aquaculture in the area. If it is not feasible, salt water aqua culture is to be stopped in the area.
With regard to environmental compensation, no methodology for calculation of environmental compensation is available pertaining to violations done by aqua farms. Hence, it is recommended to direct CAA and Fisheries Department to levy penalty from illegal aqua farms owners, who are authorized to impose penalty. They are liable to Environmental compensation under polluter pay principle The Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board APPCB) did not filed any independent statement as to the nature of action taken by them in respect of the same?
Page 65 of 140 14APPCB representative informed that they are filing the independent statement on behalf of their department.
5. The committee as well as official respondents are directed to file a detailed report showing the name of the persons who are conducting such shrimp culture how many of them are unauthorized, what is the nature of action taken against each unit and also to assese the environmental compensation and suggest the remedial measures for restoring the damage caused to the environment and report to this Tribunal.
It is submitted that the Shrimp pond wise authorized / unauthorized data with farmer wise already mentioned in the para No.1 and necessary direction may kindly be given to the Coastal Aqua Culture Authority regarding the demolition of unauthorized aqua ponds as per CAA Act, 2005. It is further submitted that there is no methodology for computation of environmental compensation pertaining to aqua farms. They are liable to Environmental compensation under polluter pay principle Regarding the remedial measures, it is submitted that the aquaculture requires saline water 86 the agricultural paddy fields require sweet water. The coexistence of both needs proper planning for freshwater Ss wastewater management. The wastewater discharge from the aquaculture shall not be allowed into the freshwater canals/tanks. There shall be a dedicated drain/ pipeline to discharge saline water from the aqua ponds to the UpputeruKaluva/ Buckingham canal in case of allowing aquaculture in the area. If it is not feasible, salt water aqua culture is to be stopped in the area.
To assess the individual damage if any caused to the applicants on account of the alleged illegal activities of the party respondents and if so to assess the compensation individually depending upon the level of damage sustained by a particular applicant instead of giving a common finding that there was general damage caused and assessing compensation. They are also directed to show the distance between each unit from the properties of the applicant, so that the proximity of the unit which is likely to cause contamination can be made a yardstick for payment of compensation to the applicant. If there is any damage caused to the property on account of the alleged illegal activities of any of the respondents this must be specifically mentioned in the report to be submitted by the committee and they must also suggest the remedial measures to rectify the same.
In reply to the above para, it is requested to direct the agriculture department to assess the damage cause to the agriculture activity carried out by the applicants and it is to be compensated by the penalty levied on unauthorized aqua farrns. Further, damage caused to the soil, steps to be taken for remediation will be studied by the expert agency.
The APPCB as well as other official respondents are directed to file the independent statement showing the nature of action taken by them against such units which they are expected to exercise under the provisions of law dealing with the same.
The individual statements will be submitted.
Page 66 of 140 15Further it is submitted that the committee made the following:
Recommendations The lessees should take necessary measures to convert the lands which are not fit for agriculture into shrimp ponds.
Only lands which are not fit for agriculture which were certified by the Agriculture Department should be allowed to convert into brackish water shrimp culture and for Aqua cultivation.
The mechanism should consist of Senior Agricultural Scientist, Officers from the board of Pollution and Control, Fisheries, Ground Water and Audit as members of the agency.
In order to avoid problems of ground water Stalinization, cirawal of ground water is strictly prohibited for shrimp aquaculture. It must be ensured that piezometers / ground water monitoring bore wells preferably 4 / ha (along the periphery of the pond) are installed to monitor salinity ingress. In case of salinity ingress, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority should ensure immediate closure of the farms.
An underground pipe line may be constructed which may be convenient to drain the waste water freely. The drain should be connected to salt pond or Buckingham canal whichever is nearer to the ponds. The cost of constructing the drain will be collected from shrimp cultivators irrespective of owners of the land. (OR) A common drain system may be connected to a pond which the cost of construction has been shared between public and the owner of shrimp cultivators irrespective of owner ship of the land in the ratio of 25:75.
Take necessary measures to all high saline ground water for shrimp farming because the saline water with high PH value is unfit for agricultural and drinking purposes. But, as such farm shall have pollution free or eco friendly drain system.
Category wise land utilization with survey numbers may be tagged with GPS to prevent encroachments of Government lands.
Necessary measures should be taken to reclaim the agricultural lands and the cost of reclaiming will be collected from the responsible shrimp cultivators.
The departments concerned may take necessary steps to quick disposal of the legal issues in the Honorable courts by timely responding according to the directions of the Honorable courts.
To include Ground Water Department, Irrigation Department and Forest Department as a members into the District Level Committee (DLC) where the application for approval of Aqua ponds is being scrutinized and finalized.
11.To disconnect the Electrical connections this has been got unauthorizedly.
12. To demolish the Aqua ponds which have no approvals by duly following the procedure laid down under CAA Rules.
13.1nstitutionalization of Aqua cultivation in the said Mandals.
I4.Minimum of 100mtrs distance may to be maintained between the Aqua ponds and Agricultural fields.
15.Minimum of 2 ICms distance may be maintain from the habitation containing more than 500 members to the Aqua ponds.
Page 67 of 14016. A committee consisting of different departments like Agriculture, Revenue, Electricity and Forest while issuing Electrical connections for Aquaculture may be constituted for issuing No Objection Certificate.
Action to be taken immediately:
1.To be demolished all unauthorized shrimp ponds by the Coastal Aqua Culture Authorities as per CAA Act, 2005.
2.To remove all illegal Electrical connections and Electrical polls by Electrical Department
3.Encroachments should be removed immediately by Revenue Department
4.Immediate steps to be taken for cultivation of Paddy crops in the affected area by Agricultural Department."
33. Thereafter, this Tribunal passed the following order:-
"9. It is seen from the report that there are large numbers of unauthorised shrimp culture and prawn culture farms but it is not mentioned in the report as to what is the nature of action taken by the regulators to remove the unauthorised shrimp farms. They are only putting the blame from one department to another department.
10. The Pollution Control Board (PCB) had filed a counter affidavit showing the details of the quality of the water and collecting water samples from Puli Kaluva, Etigattukaluva, Mallam Tank and Pedakamanuvagu and found the presence of saline water in these water bodies. But they have not mentioned anything about the water bodies namely, Royyalakaluva and Palamaduguvagu and they have mentioned about the fixing of pipes in the place of bunds to drain contaminated and highly salinity water in Puli kalua, Yetiggattukaluva and Swarnamukhi (Royyalavagu). But they have not mentioned about the fixing of such unauthorised pipes and whether any sample has been taken from the those outlets so as to ascertain the nature of effluents that is being discharged from the unauthorised shrimp culture farms. They have also not conducted any soil or sediment test either from the agricultural land or from the water bodies, so as to ascertain as to how far this has affected the water body and the soil fertility in order to assess the compensation payable to the agriculturists whose lands are affected on account of the same.
11. They have also not mentioned about the illegal extraction of ground water and if so what is the nature of action taken for these purposes.
12. It is mentioned in the counter affidavit by Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) that Government of Andhra Pradesh had issued New Act (Act 29 of 2020) Andhra Pradesh State Aqua Culture Development Authority Act, 2020 duly incorporating penal provisions on the un-authorised aqua farms.
13. But it may be mentioned here, that the above act will not prevent the regulator Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) from taking action against offenders who are causing pollution caused to the water bodies and contamination of the soil on account of the activities of these shrimp culture units, as alleged in the complaint filed by the applicants.
14. Further if the Pollution Control Board feels that such type of activities should also brought under their regime of the consent mechanism, then they will have to evolve a policy for the purpose of including them also in the consent mechanism if they are convinced that such activities are likely to cause greater pollution to water and that will have to be regulated in order to protect the quality of the water in the area.Page 68 of 140
15. The Pollution Control Boards are having power in view of the directions given by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) bringing pollution activities within the purview of the consent mechanism.
16. Under such circumstances, we direct the individual authorities who are the regulators to regulate such activities to file independent reports regarding the action taken by them against persons who are perpetrating illegal activities causing pollution and causing damage to environment and apart from the committee to file a detailed report regarding the further action and also the gap that has been pointed out by this Tribunal regarding the non-mentioning of certain issues that have been projected in the application and also give a further report regarding the progress of the implementation of the recommendations made by the committee to resolve the issues and assess the environmental damage caused and also assess the environmental compensation for fixing the liability on those persons who are responsible for the same while conducting proper study including any expert whom they feel necessary to be co-opted for that purpose and submit a further action taken report as directed before this Tribunal on or before 27.08.2021 by e-filing in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hardcopies to be produced as per rules.
17. The regulators are directed to take immediate steps by following the rules in vogue for closure of the unauthorised units and also disconnection of power supply and they should not be allowed to continue their operation. If it is not done by the authorities, then the persons responsible will be taken to task by this Tribunal for not implementing the directions of this Tribunal in its letter and spirit. But before taking coercive steps, they are directed to follow the procedure to be followed in accordance with law.
18. The Aqua Culture Authority, Fisheries Department and also the District Collector were made members of the committee. If they are coming within the regime of those authorities and when it is brought to their notice about such large scale violation, they are expected to take strict action against those violators in accordance with law and to come with a proper report as what is the nature of action taken by them to remove the unauthorised shrimp culture farms which are causing pollution to the soil as well as water.
19. Further the committee has expressed their inability to assess the environmental compensation as according to them further study will have to be done by the agricultural department. If such a study has to be conducted, there is no bar for the District Collector to include such a person also in the committee to assess the environmental compensation and also compensation payable to the neighbouring agricultural persons who have come with an application claiming compensation as well.
20. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) being the regulator is expected to give the methodology by which the contamination caused to the ground water and the soil can be restored and assess the amount required for restoration and also make the persons responsible for the same while applying „Polluter‟s Pay Principal‟ depending upon the contribution made by the individual unauthorised owners of the shrimp culture farms and also depending upon the nearness to the property to which the damage has been caused by their activities."
34. The Joint Committee has filed the report dated 25.10.2021, received on the same day which reads as follows:-
Page 69 of 140 1a Committee report on the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, South Zone, vide Item Nos.3 to 11 in OA No.114 of 2020 to OA No.122 of 2020 Dt:10-6-2021 It is submitted that in obedience to the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, South Zone, Chennai in OA No.114 of 2020 to OA No.122 of 2020 Dt:10-6-2021, on 03-07-2021 under the chairmanship of Sub Collector, Gudur, a meeting has been conducted with the following line departments who are regulators in regulating unauthorized shrimp culture in Pittvanipalli, Ranganadapuram and Padartivarikandriga Villages Fisheries Department Police Department A.P. Pollution Control Board Revenue Department Ground Water Department Agriculture Department Irrigation Department Electricity Department Panchayat Raj Department In the said meeting directions had been issued to the concerned departments to take necessary steps in order to comply the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, South Zone, Chennai and finally directed to file individual action taken report department wise on or before 1-8-2021. In continuation to the above meeting an another meeting was also conducted to review the progress on the action taken by the individual departments on 5-8- 2021 as well as on 18-8-2021.
Accordingly all the line departments had submitted their action taken reports on the unauthorized shrimp cultures in Pittvanipalli, Ranganadapuram and Padartivarikandriga Villages of Chittamur Mandal.
The Fisheries Department along with the Police, Revenue, Electricity and Ground Water, Agriculture, Panchayatraj and Irrigation departments inspected the subjected villages and noticed that there are totally 135 farmers are cultivating unauthorized shrimp culture in an extent of 139.96 Hectors in three villages of Chittamur Mandal.
Accordingly notices were issued to the concerned farmers by the regulating departments ie., ( Fisheries as well as Electricity) on the unauthorized ponds as well as illegal electrical connections. Aggrieved on the Page 70 of 140 2 2 above notices some of the farmers had approached Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh with a request to stop the demolition activity.
Since the orders of the Hon'ble High Court are pending on the above Writ Petitions, they were not demolished. After excluding the said court pending cases, unauthorized ponds in an extent of 110.08 Hectors covering 175 ponds belongs to 119 farmers were got demolished by the Fisheries Department under the protection of Police Department by imposing 144 Section in the area. In addition, the unauthorized Electrical service connections of 66 nos. in the said ponds were disconnected by the Electricity department. An abstract showing the status of the demolition of the aqua ponds is submitted below:
ABSTRACT Demolished Court Cases Authorized Total No. of Farmers No. of Farmers No. of Farmers No. of Farmers Extent (in Ha.) Extent (in Ha.) Extent (in Ha.) SI.No No. of Ponds No. of Ponds No. of Ponds No. of Ponds Village (in Ha. ) Extent Pittivanipalli 80 57.77 102 2 5.02 14 17 15.17 32 99 77.96 148 2 Padarthivarikandriga 10 8.77 12 7 8.98 15 11 9.86 16 28 27.61 43 3 Ranganadhapuram 29 43.54 61 11 27.63 37 0 0 0 40 71.17 98 Total 119 110.08 175 20 41.63 66 28 25.03 48 167 176.74 289 Abstract showing the disconnected electrical service connections to the unauthorized aqua ponds is submitted below:
No of services SI.No Name of the Village disconnected 1 Pittivanipalli 39 2 Padartivarikandriga 6 3 Ranganadapuram 16 TOTAL 61 Photos showing the Demolishing Activities are hereunder Page 71 of 140 3 3 Further 96 tube wells which were in said unauthorized aqua ponds were brought in to not useful condition by disconnecting the electrical supply to those tube wells by the Ground Water department. The Government land involved in the said unauthorized ponds were taken possession by the Tahsildar, Chittamur and subsequently sign boards have been erected in the said Government land mentioning the said land is a Government land and necessary action initiated in the trespasses.
It is further submitted that in the above three villages aqua ponds discharges the waste water into Royyalakaluva, Yetigunta Kaluva and Palamadugu Kaluva.
Regarding Royyakaluva is a distributaries of Swarnamukhi river which off takes from Swarnamuki River near Vemuguntapalem Village in Naidupet Mandal and finally merges with salt water creak of Pulicat lake.
Regarding Yetigunta kaluva is a distributoary of Pulikaluva ( Mallam tank supply channel ) and it feeds the agriculture fields in Pittivanipalli, Padarativarikandriga and Ranganadapuram Villages in Chittamur Mandal.
Regarding Palamaudugu Kaluva is a drain channel that carries excess flood water from Pulikaluva ( Mallam Tank supply channel) and it merges with Royyalakaluva. Further Pulikaluva (Mallam Tank Supply Channel) which takes off from Mallam Anicut constructed across Royalakaluva, is the only source to Mallam Minor Irrigation tank.
It is submitted that as per the action take report of the Irrigation Department it has stated that the waste water of aqua ponds are discharging waste water into Pulikaluva ( Mallam Tank supply channel) through which entering into the Mallam Tank.
Therefore estimations were prepared for construction of regulator across Pulikaluva ( Mallam Tank supply channel) to divert waste water from Aqua ponds into Palamaduguvagu in Chittamur Mandal which is a drainage channel and accordingly proposals amounting for Rs. 30 lakhs was submitted by the Irrigation authorities to the District Collector, SPSR Nellore and the work will be initiated soon after getting the administrative sanction.Page 72 of 140 4 4
It is further submitted that as per the soil sample tests results which were conducted by the Agriculture Department, it has been observed that there are totally 31 soil samples were collected in the agriculture fields which are adjacent to the aqua ponds in Pittivanipalli, Ranganadapuram and Padartivarikandriga Villages of Chittamur Mandal and reported that 29 sample results are in the range of 0.2 to 1.5 EC, only 2 sample results are critical for germination which are having 3.7 and 3.9 ( Electrical Conductivity) and only one sample is injures to crop which is having 4.6 ( Electrical Conductivity).
It is submitted that as per the recommendations of the scientist, the suitable reclamation to those three samples as application of Farm Yard Mannure ( FY1VI) and growing of new manure crop to the samples containing ECs 3.7 and 3.9 and application of lime @ 135 Kgs per acre to the sample containing EC 4.6 Further as per the action taken report of the Agriculture Authorities, it has been evaluated that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past 5 years, there is no yield loss to the paddy fields in the subjected areas. By this it is clear that there is no loss to the paddy fields in the subjected villages and regarding the three samples which are having EC above 3.7, awareness will be created among the fanners as per recommendations of scientists.
It is also observed that regarding drinking water there are no open well or borewell water is being used for drinking water purpose in the Pittivanipalli Village and the drinking water is supplied through borewell point situated in Chittamur village to the Pittivanipalli Village and the said pipe line is not passing through the prawn culture ponds. Further it is observed that there is no pollution for drinking water in Padartivarikandriga Village and Ranganadapuram village and further noticed that the aqua ponds are at a distance of the 3krn from the habitations which are within norms guided by the Coastal Aqua Culture Authority.
Further as per the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer there are no allegations received against the contamination of drinking water or quality of drinking water supplied in the said villages of Chittamur Mandal.
Samples were collected from the Mallam tank 86 its surrounding villages on 25.06.2021. The analysis results are tabulated below:
Point of Samples collection Parameters Value pH 6.99 Royyalavagu, Near Thagethamma Total Suspended Solids 12 temple, Mallam (V), Chittamur (M) (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 14322 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 44 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 8.4 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Page 73 of 140 5 S Palamaduguvagu, Pittuvanipalli (V), PH 6.87 Chittamur (M). Total Suspended Solids 10 (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 13194 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 36 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 7.0 Demand (130D) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Malian tank at Thunadalu, Gd Road, PH 7.23 Nidigurthy Road, Mallam (V), Total Suspended Solids 18 Chittamur (M). (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 5336 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 40 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 8.2 Demand (130D) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Malian tank near PH 7.32 Jalagarthipalem(Nagarukomma Total Suspended Solids 16 Temple), Nidigurthy Road, Mallam (TSS) in mg/lit (V), Chittamur (M). Total Dissolved Solids 5487 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 36 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 7.0 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Zomaral tank, Mallam (V), Chittamur PH 7.65 (M). Total Suspended Solids 20 (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 1318 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 52 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 9.4 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Etigattukaluva, ps 7.76 PecihavarthivariKandriga (V), Total Suspended Solids 16 Chittamuru (M). (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 12587 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 32 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 6.8 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Puli kaluva at Muttumbakam (V), PH 7.05 Vakadu (M). Total Suspended Solids 12 (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 4861 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 28 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 5.2 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 27°C in mg/lit Samples from Aqua ponds which will be discharged into the channels after completion of the aquaculture activity:Page 74 of 140 6 6
Aqua pond of ParriRavanaiah, pH 7.09
Pittuvanipalli (V), Chittamuru (M). Total Suspended Solids 12
(TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 18300
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 28
Demand (COD) in
mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 5.8
Demand (BOD) for 3
days @ 270C in mg/lit
Water sample collected at Pull px 7.08
kaluva, Near Pittuvanipalli,
Chittamur (m).
Total Suspended Solids 14
(TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 4990
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 32
Demand (COD) in
mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 6.6
Demand (BOD) for 3
days @ 270C in mg/lit
Aqua pond of Hemanth Reddy, pH 6.91
Pittuvanipalli (V), Chittamur (M). Total Suspended Solids 10
(TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 11309
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 32
Demand (COD) in
mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 6.4
Demand (BOD) for 3
days @ 270C in mg/lit
Aqua pond adjacent to the Puli pH 7.43
kaluva, Pittuvanipalli. (V), Total Suspended Solids 18
Chittamur (M). (TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 5569
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 36
Demand (COD) in
mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 6.8
Demand (BOD) for 3
days @ 270C in mg/lit
Sample collected from Aqua pond pH 6.71
of Mahesh Reddy, Muttumbakam Total Suspended Solids 16
N) , Vakadu (M). (TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 5922
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen 24
Demand (COD) in
mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 5.0
Demand (BOD) for 3
days @ 270C in mg/lit
Page 75 of 140
7
7
Ground water samples:
Bore well water sample collected PH 7.65
ZP high school, Mallam (V), Total Suspended Solids 8
Chittamur (M). (TSS) in mg/lit
Total Dissolved Solids 1410
(TDS) in mg/lit
Chemical Oxygen Demand 16
(COD) in mg/lit
Biochemical Oxygen 2.4
Demand (BOD) for 3 days®
270C in mg/lit
Bore well water sample collected PH 6.72
at Ranganadhapuram Panchayat, Total Suspended Solids 10
Pittuvanipalli (V), Chittaraur (M) (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 880 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 16 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 2.6 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Bore well water sample collected Pli 7.18 at Muttumbakam M, Vakadu (M). Total Suspended Solids 6 (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 4608 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 16 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 2.4 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit Bore well water sample collected P" 7.27 at Anganwadi primary school, Total Suspended Solids 8 Chittamur (V & M). (TSS) in mg/lit Total Dissolved Solids 1835 (TDS) in mg/lit Chemical Oxygen Demand 12 (COD) in mg/lit Biochemical Oxygen 2.2 Demand (BOD) for 3 days @ 270C in mg/lit The aqua ponds are located in the Aqua Zone earmarked by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Hence, the Committee humbly submit the Honible National Green Tribunal that the environmental compensation may not be imposed on the aqua ponds as since there is no yield loss to the agricultural fields.
Further, it is required to stop the discharge of saline water into the fresh water bodies. Accumulated salts if any in the water bodies will get diluted during the rains/ floods. Pull kaluva is the main feeding channel for Mallam tank. The flow in this channel will be high during rains/ floods. In the remaining period, flow will be very less and some of the aqua ponds discharge their wastewaters into the Puli kaluva.
To achieve this, a regulator need to be provided at a suitable location to divert water during non-rainy days to Palamadugu Vagu to facilitate discharge of saline water into Sea. Accordingly, the Irrigation Department already submitted their estimations for construction of the shutters at Puli Kaluva to divert the aqua wastewater to the Palamadugu drainage channel during the non-rainy days.
Page 76 of 140 8 8It is further submitted that regarding the progress of the recommendations All the electrical connections in unauthorized ponds which are having no court cases were got disconnected.
Regarding the installation of groundwater monitoring wells along the periphery of aqua ponds, the Deputy Director, Ground Water has requested to the Director, Groundwater and Water Audit Dept., Vijayawada for according permission from their Directorate. Soon after getting permission necessary action will be initiated.
The Government lands which are having unauthorized aqua culture were handed over to the Revenue authorities and subsequently signing boards have been erected in the said land mentioning that the said land is Government land and action will be initiated on the trespassers.
Proposal to drain out the waste water entering into MaIlam tank supply channel from Aqua ponds into Palamadugukaluva (which is a drainage channel) though there are small objections by the Agricultural ryoths who are pumping water from Palamadugukaluva by constructing a regulator across MaIlam tank supply channel the Aqua water entering into this channel may be diverted into Palamadugukaluva is submitted to the District Collector, SPSR Nellore for according sanction approvals.
Involved all the line departments who are the regulators in the committee of approvals for No Objection Certificates for new aqua ponds applications as per the norms of Andhra Pradesh State Aqua Culture Development Authority.
I) It is submitted that as per the report of the Division Panchayt Officer, Gudur there is no open well or borewell water is being used for drinking water purpose in the Pittivanipalli Village and the drinking water is supplied through borewell point situated in Chittamur village to the Pittivanipalli Village and the said pipe line is not passing throught the prawn culture ponds. Further reported that there is no pollution residing at Padartivarikandiga Village and Ranganadapuram village.
g) It is further reported that the prawn culture is cultivating at a distance of 3 Kms from the said villages.
Page 77 of 140h) As since there is no yield loss to the paddy farmers and moreover out of 31 random soil tests only two tests are critical and one is injures to crop. The scientist recommended the suitable reclamation to those three samples as application of Farm Yard Manure (FYM) and growing of green manure crop to the samples containing EC-3.7 and 3.9 and application of lime @ 135 kg per acre to the sample containing EC-4.6. The same recommendations were allotted by the agriculture department by guiding the said farmers.
This is submitted for favour of kind information."
35. The State Pollution Control Board also filed the report dated 25.10.2021, received on the same day which reads as follows:-
"Report of the APPCB in the matter of Original Application Nos. 114 to 122 of 2020 filed before the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ), Chennai by Mallapu Chengamma & others, against Aquaculture activity in Chittamuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District It is to submit that Mallapu Chengamma & others filed an Original Application Nos. 114 to 122 of 2020 before the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai.
The Hon'ble NGT (SZ), Chennai issued an order on 10.06.2021 with a specific direction to the APPCB i.e. to collect to samples from water bodies, agriculture lands, aqua ponds; to suggest the remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of restoring the damage caused to the environment; to assess the amount required for restoration; to evolve the methodology to assess the environmental compensation on the un authorized shrimp farmers and to evolve the methodology to assess the compensation to the farmers for whose lands were affected. A Copy of the Hon'ble NGT order dat. 10.06.2021 is herewith enclosed as Annexure-l.
In obedience to the orders of the Hon'ble NGT, the A.P. Pollution Control Board has collected samples from the Mallam tank and its surrounding villages on 25.06.2021. The analysis results are tabulated below:Page 78 of 140 Page 79 of 140 Page 80 of 140 Page 81 of 140
The copies of the comprehensive analysis reports are herewith enclosed for kind perusal as Annexure-II.
SOIL ANALYSIS OF THE AGRICULTURAL FIELDS The Agriculture department collected 31 soil samples from paddy fields and analyzed the pH, Electrical Conductivity, Nitrogen, Phosphorous, Potassium, Sulphur, Boron, Zinc, Ferrous, Manganese and Copper. From the analysis two samples were critical for germination which are having Electrical Conductivity-3.7 & 3.9 dSm'and One sample is injurious to crop which is having Electrical Conductivity of 4.6 dSm-1. The remaining samples are suitable for cultivation of paddy crop. They further reported that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past 5 years there is no yield loss to the paddy fields in the subjected areas.
In response to the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, the Fisheries department demolished 110.08 Hectares of aqua ponds (175 nos) on 29.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 in presence of the revenue & other department officials. Aqua ponds in 41.63 Hectares (66 nos) were not demolished due to court orders.
The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board has requested the Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU), Kakinada for the following tasks:
1. To suggest the remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of restoring the damage caused to the environment.
2. To assess the amount required for restoration.
3. To evolve the methodology to assess the environmental compensation on the un- authorized shrimp farmers.
4. To evolve the methodology to assess the compensation to the farmers for whose lands were affected.
Accordingly, the team from the JNTUK visited the area, studied the available data and submitted the preliminary report with the following recommendations:
1. The remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of restoring the damage caused to the environment.
The results of the water samples indicate that almost all parameters are within the discharge standards stipulated by the MoEF&CC, Govt. of India. However, the aqua culture activity requires high saline water which is not suitable for paddy fields. Waste water from the aqua ponds contains salts and does not contain harmful chemicals such as heavy metals and phenols. It is required to stop the fresh discharge of saline water effluents into the fresh water bodies when higher saline values are found in Mallam tank inlet. Accumulated salts if any in the water bodies will get diluted during the rains/ floods.
Puli kaluva is the main feeding channel for Mallam tank. The flow in this channel will be high during rains/ floods. In the remaining period, flow will be very less and some of the aqua ponds discharge their effluents (Wastewaters) into the Puli kaluva. It is required to provide a regulator at a suitable location to divert water during non-rainy days to Palamaduguvagu so as to facilitate discharge of saline water into Sea.
2. Assessment of amount required for restoration.
Once saline water entry into Mallam tank was stopped, the TDS in the Mallam tank becomes normal. Hence, there is no need for preparation of restoration plan separately.
3. Evolution of methodology to assess the environmental compensation on the un- authorized shrimp farmers.
The Fisheries department demolished 110.08 Ha of aqua ponds (175 nos) on 29.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 in presence of the revenue & other department officials. Aqua ponds in 41.63 Ha (66 nos) were not demolished due to court orders. There is meager activity going on in these unauthorized aqua ponds ever since their bunds were demolished i.e. since 30-07-2021.
However, the APPCB may submit to the Hon'ble NGT not to impose Environmental Compensation on the aqua ponds as it is an activity very much similar to the agriculture and most of paddy farmers are showing interest to switch over to the aqua culture to sustain their livelihood.
4. Evolution of the methodology to assess the compensation to the farmers for whose lands were affected.
The Agriculture department collected 31 soil samples from paddy fields and analyzed the PH, Electrical conductivity, Nitrogen, Phosphorous, Potassium , Sulphur, Boron, Zinc, Ferrous, Manganese and Copper. From the analysis two samples were critical for germination which are having Electrical conductivity-3.7 dSm-1 & 3.9 dS m-1 and One sample is injurious to crop which is having Electrical conductivity of 4.6dS m -1. The remaining samples are suitable for cultivation of paddy crop. High Electrical Conductivity of samples could not be attributed to the aqua culture activity in the area. There is a possibility that the soil may have high electrical conductivity due to close proximity of the saltwater creek in the area.
The Agriculture department recommended for application of farm yield manure and lime for the paddy fields which are having high electrical conductivity. They further reported that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past 5 years there is no yield Page 82 of 140 loss to the paddy fields in the subjected areas. Hence, there may not be any requirement of compensation distribution to the paddy farmers.
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
1. APPCB collected the water samples from the water bodies when there was less water, about 10% of its maximum holding capacity. APPCB/ Fisheries department shall collect samples from the water bodies in the area on monthly basis for a period of six months to ascertain the actual scenario on a holistic basis.
2. The aqua ponds are located in the Aqua Zone earmarked by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Hence, environmental compensation need not be imposed on the aqua ponds. However, they may be directed to obtain necessary approvals before starting the aqua culture activity in the area.
3. The Fisheries Department may provide Online TDS Meter at outlet of Mallam Tank which is leading to the paddy fields. This is required to ascertain the Salinity of water used for agriculture. In case of TDS values in outlet in excess of the permissible values, the Government authorities may take immediate remedial measures to regulate the entry of saline water streams into the Mallam Tank.
Final report will be submitted after evolution of the analysis results of the samples collected for a period of 6 months.
A copy of the report submitted by the JNTU, Kakinada is herewith enclosed for kind perusal as Annexure-III.
As per the recommendations of the JNTU, Kakinada, the APPCB will continue collection of the samples on monthly basis for a period of six months to ascertain the actual scenario on a holistic basis.
Further, it is submitted that the Collector & District Magistrate, SPSR Nellore district constituted a Committee and the committee has submitted a detailed report to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal. This answering respondent is a member in the said committee. The committee submitted detailed observations on aqua farming in the area and action taken based on the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal."
36. The Agriculture University also filed the report dated 25.10.2021, e-filed on the same day in the form of letter along with certain details in tabular form which reads as follows:-
"Sub : Aquaculture- Chittamur Mendal - Soil samples collected - On the implementation of the orders of the Hon‟ble National Green Tribunal issued in GA No.114 of 2020 to OA No.122 of 2020 Dt 10-6-2021 Sent to Lab- analysis report received and same is hereby submitted Reg.
Ref : Minutes of the meeting held on 5.8.2021 by Revenue Divisional Officer Gudur.
With reference to the subject cited above, I am here with submitting that some of the farmers in Chintamur mandal are cultivating aquaculture in their fields. Some of the neighboring farmers of same mandal were complained that due to those cultivation of aquaculture the paddy fields are affecting In this circumstances, the Mandal Agricultural Officer, Chiltamur Mendal has collected soil samples (31 Samples) fields which are adjacent to Aquaculture acids and sent to Soil Testing Laboratory, Nellore The Laboratory authorities has analyzed the samples and sent the analysis report stating that among 31 samples 2 samples are critical for germination which are having 3.7 and 3.9 EC and one sample is injurious to crop which is having 4.6 EC.
Further I submit that the laboratory authorities are also recommended the suitable reclamation to those 3 samples / Fields) as application of Farm Yard Manure (FYM) and growing of Green Mannuer crop to the samples containing EC3.7 and 3.9 and application of Lime @ 135 Kgs per acre to the sample Field containing EC 4.6. The remaining samples are suitable for cultivation of Paddy crop.
Further I submitted that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past 5 years in the subject area i.e., Pittivaniapalli, Ranganadapuram and Padartivanikandriga Villages it has been observed that there is no yield loss in the paddy fields.
Hence this is submitted for favor of kind information."
37. The Electricity Department also filed the report dated 19.08.2021 in the form of letter, received on 25.10.2021 wherein they have given the details of the disconnection of power supply made in different villages.
Page 83 of 14038. The Fisheries Department filed report in the form of letter dated 23.08.2021 regarding the nature of action taken by them in tune with the Joint Committee report and as such, we are not re-extracting the same.
39. The Fisheries Department also filed another report dated 23.10.2021 in the form of letter, received on 25.08.2021 which reads as follows:-
"Sub:- Fisheries - SPSR Nellore - Chittamur Mandal - Pittivanipalli, Ranganadapuran and Padartivarikandriga villages - Implementation of orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal in OA No.114/2020 to 122/2020 Dt: 10-6-2021 - Demolition of unauthorized aqua ponds on 23-10-2021- further action taken report - submitted - Reg.
Ref:- 1. Orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai in OA No. 114/2020 to 122/2020 Dt 10-6-2021
2. Orders of the Hon'ble High Court, AP, in WP No.13368 of 2021 dt 12-07-2021
3. Orders of the Hon'ble High Court, AP, in WP No13615 of 2021 dt 14-07-2021
4. Orders of the Hon'ble High Court, AP, in WP No.14646 of 2021 dt 28-07-2021
5. Orders of the Hon'ble High Court, AP, in WP No.14232 of 2021 dt 17-08-2021
6. This Office letter No 1053/D/2019 Dt: 23-8-2021 In obedience to the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai dt 10- 06-2021 it is submitted that this office submitted detail report on demolition of Unauthorized aqua ponds situated in Pittivumipalli, Ranganadapuram and Pndartivarikandriga villages of Chittamur Mandal vide reference 6th cited except the writ petitioners filed before Hon'ble High Court A.P Amaravathi.
Further it is to submit that vide reference 2ed to 5th cited the certain un authorized aqua farmers approached the Hon'ble High Court A.P in WP Nos. 13615 of 2021 13368 of 202, 14232 of 20210 14646 of 2021 and the Court passed orders dt 14-07-2021,12-07- 2021,17-08-2021 6 & 14646 respectively as follows.
"the petitioners are given liberty to submit their explanations to the impugned notice, dated 26.06.2021 issued by the Joint Director, Fisheries Department, SPSR Nellore, within two (02) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such explanation from the petitioners, the appropriate authority is directed to deal with the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of explanation from the petitioners. Till the explanation submitted by the petitioners is dealt with and disposed of, the respondents are directed not to make any coercive steps against the subject prawn ponds"
In this Connection it is to submit that no explanation representations have been filed by the Writ Petitioner within the stipulated time given by the Hon'ble High Court orders passed in WP Nos. 13615 or 2021. 13368 of 2021, 14232 of 2021& 14646 of 2021 and the Asst Director of Fisheries has further reported that the writ petitioners have violated the guidelines stipulated in 4.9 under Rule 3 of Chapter II of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act 2005 and also the validity period of registration of aquaculture farm has already been expired under sub- section 3 of Section 13 Coastal Aquaculture authority Act 2005. Hence the aqua pond of the Writ Petitioner clearly attempts the violation of the norms and guidelines of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act 2005. Accordingly the Joint Director of fisheries passed orders dt 20.10-2021 and demolished the following unauthorized Aqua ponds in Pittavanipolli, Padharthivari kandriga & Ranganadhapuran villages in Chittamur Mandal on 23-10-2021 as follows.
Sl. Village Demolished on 23.10.2021 (in W.P. Nos.13615 of 2021,
No. 13368 of 2021, 14232 of 2021 & 14646 of 2021)
No. of Extent (in No. of Ponds
Farmers Ha.)
1 Pittivanipalli 11 10.24 28
2 Padarthivari 7 5.65 09
kandriga
3 Ranganadhapuram 3 6.82 12
Total 21 18.71 66
It is also submitted that the Writ petitioners in WP No 14554 of 2021 & WP Nos. 13652 of 2021 & 14646 of 2021 have submitted their explanation within stipulated time and action will be initiated after remarks submitted by the Asst. Director of Fisheries Gudur, Whereas in WP Nos 3342 of 2020 & WP No15162 of 2021 are pending at Hon'ble High Court and writ petitioners aqua ponds were not demolished. After excluding the said Page 84 of 140 court pending cases, unauthorized ponds in an extent of 132.79 Hectors covering 224 ponds belongs to 140 farmers were got demolished by the Fisheries Department with the cooperation and protection of Revenue & Police Department by imposing 144 Section in the area.
An abstract showing the status of the demolition of the aqua ponds is submitted below ABSTRACT Sl. Village Demolished Court Cases Authorized Total No. Extent (in Ha.) Extent (in Ha.) Extent (in Ha.) Extent (in Ha.) No. of farmers No. of farmers No. of farmers No. of farmers No. of ponds No. of ponds No. of ponds No. of ponds 1 Pittivanipalli 91 68.01 130 0 0 0 8 9.95 18 99 77.96 148 2 Padarthivari 17 14.42 21 7 3.33 8 4 9.86 14 28 27.61 43 kandriga 3 Ranganadha 32 50.36 73 6 20.81 25 0 0 0 40 71.17 98 puram Total 140 132.79 224 13 24.14 33 12 19.81 32 167 176.74 289 This is submitted for kind perusal and necessary action."
40. The Groundwater Department also filed the report dated 21.08.2021 in form of letter, received on 25.08.2021 which reads as follows:-
"Sub : Groundwater and Water Audit Department - SPSR Nellore District - Gudur Division - Chittamur Mandal - Ranaganadhapuram. Padharthivari khandrika and Pittuvanipalli Villages - Implementation of orders of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal issued vide O.A.No.114 of 2020 to O.A.No.122 of 2020 DT 10-06-2021 - Action Taken Report Submitted- Regarding.
Ref : 1 ) Orders of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal Issued vide O.A.No.114 of 2020 to O.A.No.122 of 2020 DT 10-06-2021 2 ) Minutes of the meeting held on implementation of the National Green Tribunal Order in the chambers of Sub Collector, Gudur on 03.07.2021 3) Lr.No.163 / Hg / 2020 dated 24.09.2020 of this office. 4) ) Lr.No.38 / Hg / 2021 dated 18.08.2020 of this office.
I invite kind attention to the references cited.
In obedience to the Orders of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal issued vide O.A.No.114 of 2020 to O.A.No.122 of 2020 DT 10-06-2021 and instructions of the Sub Collector Gudur which was convened during a meeting with Environmental Engineer, Pollution Control Board, Joint Director of Fisheries, Joint Director of Agriculture. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Gudur, Superintending Engineer of irrigation and APSPDCL Divisional Panchayat Officer, MPDO, Tahsildar Chittamuru. Deputy Executive Engineer of RWS and Deputy Director of Groundwater Department on 03.07.2021 to implement the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, instructed this department to assess the unauthorized bore wells and its illegal extraction of groundwater for aqua culture purpose in Ranaganadhapuram, Padharthivari khandrika and Pittuvanipaili Villages of Chittamuru Mandal and also instructed to take necessary steps for the closure of unauthorized bore wells along with Revenue Department.
Accordingly inspections have been conducted in the above said three villages and 150 tube wells which are being used for brackish water aquaculture purpose were identified. It is reported that these tube wells are constructed up to a depth range of 150 to 180 feet's or 50m to 60m bgl and energized with 5 to 7.5 HP submersible Motors lowered at 140 to 170 feet's. The present depth to water levels collected in some of the existing tube wells ranges from 2.4m to 9.2m bgl.
It is submitted that randomly few yield tests were conducted to these existing tube wells by using time & volume and jet methods and found that the tube wells are wording with good yields with an average yield ranging from 9,000 to 15,000 LPH. It is also reported that each tube well is being used at least 5 to 10 hours per day to fill their ponds. This indicates that a total of 45,000 to 150,000 liters or 45 to 150 KL of groundwater is being extracted from each tube well in a day.Page 85 of 140
It is further submitted that, as per rules in vogue, brackish water aquaculture shall be permitted with the help of surface water sources like creek / estuary / canal / backwaters only. No aqua farmer is authorized to use groundwater for the brackish water aquaculture purpose. It is also submitted that the approvals for brackish water aquaculture does not come under purview of Groundwater Dept., and our department has not given permission to anyone to use groundwater for brackish water aquaculture purpose and none of the aqua farmers have obtained feasibility report from our department to construct their tube wells. Therefore all the existing tube wells in the above said three villages are unauthorized and to be stopped from drawing groundwater.
It is further submitted as since all the tube wells are unauthorized and utilization of groundwater for brackish water aqua culture is strictly prohibited, a total of 96 tube wells out of 150 tube wells were brought into unusable condition by disconnecting power supply with the Electricity Department. No action was taken on the remaining tube wells as the farmers obtained stay order from the court (details enclosed separately). The power connection to those remaining tube wires will also be disconnected once the court stay order period expires.
Further, regarding the installation of groundwater monitoring wells along the periphery of aqua ponds, it is to submit that a request letter was sent to the Director, Groundwater and Water Audit Dept. , Vijayawada vide reference 4th cited, for installing in the said villages and further action will be taken as soon as we get the permission from our Directorate."
41. They also had given the details in a tabular form regarding the action taken by them.
42. The Irrigation Department also filed the report dated 21.08.2021 in the form of letter, received on 25.10.2021 which reads as follows:-
"Sub : Irrigation Department - Aqua - Gudur Division - Chittamur Mandal - Implementation of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal orders issued OA No. 114 to 122 of 2020- Action taken report submitted- Reg Ref : Orders of the Hon'ble NGT issued for OA No. 114 to 122 of 2020 DL.10.06.2021 On behalf of the District Collector, SPSR Nellore, I here with submit the action taken report of irrigation department regarding the discharge of Saline water into the irrigation channels in Chittamur Mandal on the petition filed before the Hon'ble N.G.T on O.A. No. 114 to 122 of 2020. During the meeting held on 03.07.2021 in the Chambers of Sub-collector office the Sub-collector, Gudur addressed the Irrigation Department to implement the orders of the Hon'ble N.G.T issued vide OA No. 114 to 122 of 2020 Dt. 10.06.2021 based on the Committee report submitted by the Joint Director of Fisheries SPSR Nellore, Environmental Engineer from A.P. Pollution Control Board SPSR Nellore, Senior Scientist (Agronomy) & Head Saline Water Scheme Bapatla, Director (Technical) Coastal Aquaculture Authority Chennai and Sub-Collector Gudur SPSR Nellore by duly coordinating with the Departments of Fisheries, Revenue, Electricity, Pollution Control Board and Ground Water. Accordingly, all the concerned department officers along with police protection dismantled the outlets of un-authorized Aqua ponds in RanganadhaPuram, Padarthivarikandriga and Pittuvanipelle villages of Chittamur Mandal on 29.07.2021 & 30.07.2021. The details of un-authorized Aqua ponds dismantled are listed herewith as follows.
Sl. Village Demolished Aqua ponds
No. No. of farmers Extent (in Ha.) No. of ponds
1 Ranganadhapuram 29 43.54 61
2 Pittuvanipalli 80 57.77 102
3 Padarthivanikandriga 10 8.77 12
119 110.08 175
Further, 37 ponds for an extent of 27.63 Ha in RanganadhaPuram (V), 14 ponds for an extent of 5.02 Ha in Pittuvanipalle (V) and 15 ponds for an extent of 8.98 Ha in Padathivanikandriga (V) are not dismantled due to the court orders as informed by the Fisheries Department.Page 86 of 140
The Aqua ponds in the above mentioned three villages of Chittamur Mandal discharge the waste water into Royyalakaluva, Yetigattukaluva & Palamadugukaluva. Royyalakaluva is a distributary of Swarnamukhi river which off takes from Swarnamukhi river near Vemuguntapalem village in Nayudupeta Mandal and finally merges with the salt water creeks of Pulicat lake Yetigattukaluva irrigation channel is a distributary of Pulikaluva ( Mellam tank supply channel ) and it feeds the Agriculture fields in Pittuvampali, m Chiltamur Mandal Padarthivarikandriga, Ranganadhapuram villages Palamadagukaluva is a drainage channel that carries excess flood water from Pulikaluva (Mallam tank supply channel) and it merges with Royyalakalava Pulikaluva (Mallam lank supply channel) which takes off from Mallam Anicut constructed across Royyalakaluva is the only source to feed to Mallam Minor Irrigation tank. The Aqua Ponds in Vakadu, Gollapalem, Durgavaram & Muttembaka villages of Vakadu Mandal are discharging the waste water into Mallam tank supply channel which were entering into Mallam tank. The villagers of Muttembaka of Vakadu Mandal approached the District Collector SPSR Nellore through their representation dated 07.07.2021 for constructing a structure across Mallam tank supply channel for diverting the waste water from Aqua ponds into Palamadugukaluva to stop the waste water entering into Mallam tank for which the District Collector instructed the Irrigation Department to submit the necessary estimate. Meanwhile, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur and the Joint Director of Fisheries, Nellore during the meeting held on 05.08.2021 also requested the Irrigation Department to verify for any possibility to divert the waste water from Aqua- ponds into any one of the existing channel. without entering into the Mallam tank. Accordingly the Engineers from the Irrigation Department examined the proposal to drain out the waste water entering into Mallam tank supply channel from Aqua ponds into Palamadugukaluva (which is a drainage channel) though there are small objections by the Agricultural ryoths who are pumping water from Palamadugukaluva. The Department opined that by constructing a regulator across Mallam tank supply channel the Aqua water entering into this channel may be diverted into Palamadugukaluva by providing shuttering arrangements. Palamadugukaluva merges with Royyalakaluva which finally adjoins the salt water creeks of Pulicat Lake, An Estimate for the work "Construction of Regulator across Pulikaluva (Mailam tank supply channel) to divert waste water from Aqua ponds into Palamaduguvagu in Chiltamur Mandal of SPSR Nellore District"
amounting for Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs only) is submitted to the District Collector, SPSR Nellore for approval. After getting the necessary sanction orders from the District Collector the work will be started.
All the above stated circumstances of the Irrigation Department regarding orders issued for OA No. 114 to 122 of 2020 Dt.10.06.2021 are submitted to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai for information and request the tribunal to pass such other orders or orders in the interest of justice."
43. They also produced the details of the construction of the regulator across Pulikaluvu Mallam Tank supply channel to divert the waste water from aquaculture ponds into the Palamaduguvagu in Chittamur Mandal of SPSR Nellore District to show the steps taken by them for the purpose of diverting the waste water that is being discharged from the aquaculture farms to another channel for the purpose of avoiding discharge of these waste water into the channel which carries fresh water.
44. The Panchayat Raj Department filed the report dated 18.08.2021 in the form of letter addressed to the District Panchayat Officer which reads as follows:-
"Roc. No. 523 / 2021 - D, Dated : 18.08.2021 Sub : Implementation of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal orders Issued in O.A.No.122 of 2020- Instructions issued by the Sub Collector, Gudur in the meeting conducted by the Sub - Collector, Gudur on 03.07.2021- Report Submitted regarding Page 87 of 140 contamination of drinking water sources with caused due to effluents discharged from the illegal shrimp culture - Report - Submitted.
Ref : 1. Rc.No.1053 / 2019, Dated 03.7.2021 of the Sub-Collector, Gudur. 2. Report of the Assistant Engineer, R.W.S, Chittamur Mandal Dated 16.07.2021 along with report issued by the Water quality monitoring laboratory, Gudur. (Received on 21.07.2021) 3. Statements of the Panchayat Secretary, Mallam and Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayats of Chittamur Mandal dated 22.7.2021. 4. Instructions of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur dated 18.08.2021 I submit that, as per the instructions issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur in the reference first cited, the Assistant Engineer, R.W.S. , Chittamur has informed that, out of the Padarthivarikandriga, Ranganathapuram and Pittuvanipalli villages of Chittamur Mandal, there is no population living in the Padarthivarikandriga and Ranganadhapuram Villages. Hence, there is only one village of Pittuvanipalli is inhabitant with population of 299 as per 2020. Further he informed that, the said village having one (1) PWS Scheme and source of the scheme is at 3 Km distance from the village and aqua ponds. or shrimp farming area. The drinking water sample collected at the source of the PWS Scheme of the Pittuvanipalli village and as per the analysis report, the TDS values are in the range of 1203 mg / lit; and physical parameters such as color, Turbidity, odor, PH Ranges, Electrical conductivity all are in safe range and the results indicate that, there is a no Physical and Chemical parameters are affected due to shrimp culture. He enclosed the report issued by the Water quality monitoring laboratory, Gudur.
Further, I submit that, I have inquired with the Panchayat Secretaries of Mallam in which the padarthivari kandriga village is situated and Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayat, in which the said Ranganathapuram and pittuvanipalli villages are situated, regarding any instances noticed about the drinking water contamination and any allegations leveled against the quality of drinking water such as, color, taste and smell etc. of drinking water supplied by the Gram Panchayats and also any complaints noticed regarding health conditions of the villagers due to consumption of drinking water supplied by the Gram Panchayats.
Further I submit that, The Panchayat Secretary, Mallam Gram Panchayat has informed through his statement stating that, there is no population residing in 1 .Padarthivarikandriga 2. Dovunikandriga 3.Kothapalem villages and in the remaining Villages of Mallam Gram Panchayat, i.e. , 1 . Mallam 2. Kotigunta 3. Sri Valipuram 4. Kokkupalem and 5. Jalapeddipalem vlages of Mallam Gram Panchayat, the Ground water is salty in taste and the water in the said villages is not feasible for drinking purpose and there are no open wells or bore well. water is being used for drinking water purpose. Hence the drinking water is being supplied from the source from the Bore well at Vakadu Village through pipeline. The area in which the Prawn culture is cultivating is at 3 Kms distance to the Gram Panchayat and the water supply pipeline is not passing through the shrimp culture areas. There are no open wells or bore wells were being used for drinking water purpose in the Gram Panchayat. Further he informed that, there are no complaints received regarding contamination of drinking water supplied by the Gram Panchayat.
Further I submit that, the Panchayat Secretary, Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayat of Chittamur Mandal has informed through her statement stating that, there are two (2) villages were in the Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayat and out of the two (2) villages there is no population residing. in the Ranganathapuram village. The Ground water in the said village is not feasible for drinking water purpose Hence, the drinking water is being supplied from the Chittamur village through pipeline and the pipeline for which the supply of drinking water to the Pittuvanipalli village is not passing through the shrimp culture ponds . The area in which the Prawn culture is cultivating is at 3 Kms distance to the said village. There are no open wells or no bore wells being used for drinking water purpose in the said village. Further informed that, there are no allegations received against the contamination of drinking water or quality of drinking water supplied by the Gram Panchayat. Sanitation work in the said village is also maintaining.
Hence, in view of the report of the Assistant Executive Engineer, R.W.S Deptt. , Chittamur Mandal in the reference first cited, and as per the written statements of the Panchayat Secretaries of the Mallam and Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayats of Chittamur Mandal in the reference third cited, I submit that, the allegation is leveled about Three (3) Villages, i.e. , 1. Padarthivarikandriga village of Mallam Gram Panchayat. 2. Ranganathapuram village and 3. Pittuvanipalli village of Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayat. But, there is no population residing at Padarthivarikandriga Village of Mallam G.P. and Ranganathapuram village of Ranganathapuram G.P , and there is only one village of Pittuvanipalli village having population and ground water is not feasible for drinking water purpose in that village and there are no open well or bore well water is being used for drinking water purpose. The drinking water is being supplied through a pipeline from a Bore well point situated in Chittamur Village to the Pittuvanipalli village of Chittamur Mandal. The said pipeline which is supplied drinking water is not passing through the prawn culture ponds. Further there are no allegations received against the Page 88 of 140 contamination of drinking water or quality of drinking water supplied in the Pittuvanipalli village of Ranganathapuram Gram Panchayat of Chittamur Mandal.
Hence, as per the instructions of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur in the fourth cited reference, it is submitted for kind perusal with a request to submit to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai."
45. The Revenue Department filed another report dated 24.08.2021 in the form of letter received from Tahsildar, Chittamur regarding the action taken which reads as follows:-
"Sub:- Aqua-Chittamur Mandal- Pittivanipalli, Ranganadapuram and Padartivarikandriga Villages-Implementation of orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai issued vide OA No.114/2020 to 122/2020 Dt:10-6-2021-Action taken Report submitted - Reg.
Ref: Orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai issued vide OA No.114/2020 to 122/2020 Dt:10.6.2021 I invite kind attention to the reference cited.
It is submitted that in obedience to the orders of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai issued vide OA No.114/2020 to 122/2020 Dt:10-6 2021 the Fisheries Department had noticed total 167 aqua farmers are having unauthorized ponds. During field verification it was brought to light that some of the farmers of unauthorized aqua ponds had approached the Hon Hon'ble High Court on the action of the aqua authorities of demolishing of aqua ponds and they are pending before the Hon'ble High Court and some are authorized ponds. After excluding those ponds which are involved in court cases before the Hon'ble High Court and authorized ponds, it had been evaluated that there are totally 119 aqua ponds farmers are there for which action has to be initiated and accordingly the fisheries authorities had demolished the unauthorized ponds.
It is submitted that as per village records, it has noticed that the following ponds which are demolished are in Government lands.Page 89 of 140 Page 90 of 140
Hence all the above ponds were taken control of the Government and subsequently a board erected in the said land mentioning the land is Government land and action will be initiated on the trespassers. The photo copies of erecting sign boards in above Government lands in which unauthorised aqua ponds were laid and got demolished are enclosed herewith for kind perusal."
46. The matter was taken up on 31.01.2022 and on that day, this Tribunal considered the report submitted by the Joint Committee dated Nil, e-filed on 31.01.2022 and extracted in Para (8) of the order. Thereafter, this Tribunal had passed the following order:-
"9. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant in all these cases submitted that some shrimp culture activities are going on and the Joint Committee has not specifically mentioned about the survey number in which the demolition and closure were effected. But in the recent report submitted certain Annexures have been provided which will go to show the details of the demolition that has been done including the survey numbers and also certain Writ Petitions are pending before the Hon‟ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. If any other details are there with the applicants regarding the persons whose activities have been closed by the authorities, but they are still continuing unauthorisedely file the same before the next hearing date and if such details are given, then the same can be verified and further report can be called for.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant also submitted that the committee has come to the conclusion that there yield loss has not occurred to any of the applicants and as such there is no necessity to impose any environmental compensation, though they found that pollution was caused to certain extent on account of such activities.
11. In the mean time, we have also received a letter petition from Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Survey Nos. 641/2, 643/1 & 645/2 Jarugumalli Village, Kota Mandalam of Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units, damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. He was also produced certain photographs showing the nature of damage caused. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal is directed to consider that aspect as well and to file a report in this regard.Page 91 of 140
12. The committee is also directed to file a detailed report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and what is the present yield that has been obtained by them or whether such pollution has prevented from doing the agricultural activity and if that be the case what is the amount of compensation that has to be imposed.
13. The above officials are directed to ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil and what is the nature of remediation to be done for the purpose of restoring the contamination, if any, to be caused to the soil and who are responsible for the same depending upon the pro-rata contribution made by the alleged violators causing pollution to the neighbouring agriculture lands.
14. The learned counsel appearing for Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) also wanted some time to submit their further details of the demolition done with survey numbers and also the report about the details furnished by the counsel appearing for the applicant regarding survey numbers where such illegal activities are still continuing after making further verifications. These things can also be considered by the Joint Committee while submitting their further report.
15. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) as well as the Joint Committee are directed to ascertain as to whether those units who have obtained necessary permission, have committed any violations of the conditions imposed on account of which pollution has been caused. If that be the case what is the amount of compensation to be realised from them. These aspects were also not answered by the committee while submitting their either in the present report or in the earlier reports filed. So these aspects will also have to be considered by them while submitting their further report.
16. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) is also directed to submit a report regarding the nature of Writ Petitions pending before the Hon‟ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition order passed and the present stage of the Writ Petition as well while submitting their further report to be filed as directed.
17. The respective departments are also directed to file their independent further action taken report in tune with the directions issued by this Tribunal before the next hearing date."
47. Pursuant to the order dated 31.01.2022, the Joint Committee has filed further report dated Nil, e-filed on 28.04.2022 which reads as follows:-
Page 92 of 140 2Preamble In the matter of OA Nos. 114-122/2020, in compliance to Hon'ble NGT vide Orders dated 22.07.2020 constituted the Joint Committee to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found. Accordingly, the Committee submitted the report to the Hon'ble NOT and the subsequently, un-authorized aqua ponds in the area are demolished in the area.
The Hon'ble NGT reviewed the case on 31.01.2022 and directed to file a report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and present yield; ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil; details of the demolition done with survey numbers; ascertain compliance of the permitted and operating units & submit the status of the pending writ petitions in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
Further, Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Kota (V&M), Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units, damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. The Hon'ble NGT directed consider that aspect and to file a report.
Hon'ble NGT Order dated 31.01.2022:
Post submission of committee report, Hon'ble NOT vide order dated 31.01.2022 has directed as follows:
4t In the meantime, we have also received a letter petition from Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Survey Nos. 641/2, 643/1 & 645/2 Kota Village, Kota Mandal of Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units, damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. He was also produced certain photographs showing the nature of damage cause. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal is directed to consider that aspect as well and to file a report in this regard The committee is also directed to file a detailed report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and what is the present yield that has been obtained by them or whether such pollution has prevented from doing the agricultural activity and if that be the case what is the amount of compensation that has to be imposed The above officials are directed to ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil and what is the nature of remediation to be done for the purpose of restoring he contamination, if any, to be caused to the soil and who are responsible for the same depending upon the pro-Page 93 of 140 3
rata contribution made by the alleged violators causing pollution to the neighbouring agriculture lands.
The learned counsel appearing for Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) also wanted some time to submit their further details of the demolition done with survey numbers and also the report about the details furnished by the counsel appearing for the applicant regarding survey numbers where such illegal activities are still continuing after making further verifications. These things can also be considered by the Joint Committee while submitting their further report The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) as well as the Joint Committee are directed to ascertain as to whether those units who have obtained necessary permission, have committed any violations of the conditions imposed on account of which pollution has been caused If that be the case what is the amount of compensation to be realised from them. These aspects were also not answered by the committee while submitting their either in the present report or in the earlier reports filed So these aspects will also have to be considered by them while submitting their further report The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) is also directed to submit a report regarding the nature of Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition order passed and the present stage of the Writ Petition as well while submitting theirfurther report to be filed as directed"
In compliance to Hon'ble NGT order, the Board officials inspected the aqua ponds located at the Kota area and also the Chittamur area, where the illegal aqua ponds are demolished. Further the APPCB is continuing the monitoring the water quality in the water bodies in the Mallam tank area. The joint committee meeting held on 04.03.2022 and the committee inspected the Kota area on 09.03.2022 and Mallam areas on 08.03.2022.
III Status of claim of crop damage at Kota Village:
The joint committee examined the claim of Sri B. Ravindra Reddy, who is claiming the crop damage in Sy.No.641/2, 643/1 and 645/2 of Kota Village of Kota Mandal, SPSR Nellore. In this regard, it is submitted that there is no paddy crop raised in the said fields for the past 7 years and hence the question of damage caused to the said fields doesn't arise due to shrimp cultivation. The shrimp culture is also at a distance beyond 100ra from the subjected land.
The Agriculture Department has conducted the soil tests at Sy. Nos. 641/2, 643/1 and 645/2 .0 (Acres) T. Extent
--. 4::.
4 `1, pH EC OC N P K S g c ce) 04 of Kota Village and details are as follows:
Page 94 of 140 4Value & Value & Value & Value & Value & Value & Value & range range range range range range range 8.1 641/2 0.95 F Moderately 13 0.48 113 25 174 43 Alkaline Normal Low Low Medium Medium High 8.5 643/1 1.55 F Highly 1.5 0.53 63 17 101 25 Alkaline Normal Medium Low Medium Low High 8.3 1.8 645/2 0.84 F Moderately 0.42 88 27 134 53 Alkaline Normal Low Low High Medium High The Joint Director of Agriculture, Nellore reported that the above Sy.Nos the pH value and the EC value are within the range and there is no harm to the paddy fields or for crop yields in the said Kota Village of Kota Mandal. The results of crop cutting experiments pertaining Kota village of Kota Mandal indicate that the paddy yield is good.
In view of the above, the question of damage to the agriculture field of Sri. B. Ravindra Reddy doesn't arise. Further it came to the light that the reason for not cultivating the subject land is because of the dispute between the complainant and also some others on the subjected land.
W. Status of demolition of the illegal shrimp tanks:
The Fisheries Department has demolished all the unauthorized ponds which are not involved in court cases in Pittuvanipalli (V), Padarthivari Kandriga(v) &Ranganadhapuram(v) Chittamuru(M), SPSR Nellore District.
Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in Pittuvanipaffi Village. S. Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or Name of the Aquafarrners No Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Konduru Baskar 3 0.95 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Chintha Reddy 3 0.79 Unauthorised Demolished Parandhama Reddy 3 4-1,2 1.58 Unauthorised Demolished Chintha reddy Kota reddy 4 Puchalapalli 5-1,2,3 1.74 Unauthorised Demolished Sudarshanamma 5 Puchalapalli 6 0.13 Unauthorised Demolished Sudarshanamma 6 Matti Seenaiah 8-1,2 0.89 Unauthorised Demolished demolished 7 Mali Seenaiah 9-P 1.80 Unauthorised No:14232/2021 9- Demolished 8 Malli Seenaiah A,A3,B, 3.22 Authorised No:14232/2021 C Page 95 of 140 9 Pith flanumanthaiah 10
5 0.26 Unauthorised Demolished 10 Devalayama Land 11 0.33 Unauthorised Demolished 11 Mani Seenaiah 12 1.85 Authorised Authorised 12 Manubolu Satheesh 14-3 1.32 Authorised Authorised 13 MaIli Seenaiah 14-1,2 135 Unauthorised W.P.No.14646 /2021 demolished 14 Manubolu Sailaja 15 1.02 Authorised Authorised 15 Manubolu Venkaiah 17-1,2 0.65 Authorised Authorised 16 Kaluva 19 0.12 Unauthorised Demolished 17 Manubolu Satheesh 20-1,3 1.32 Unauthorised Demolished 18 Rangaiah 2°-1A' 1.29 Unauthorised 2B Demolished 19 Krishna reddy 21 1.47 Unauthorised Demolished 20 Teruvayi Tirupalu 22-
1A,2,3 1.19 Unauthorised Demolished
23-
21 Rangaiah 1,2,5,6,8, 2.03 Unauthorised Demolished
9
24-
22 P Chandraiah 1,2,3,4,5, 1.77 Unauthorised Demolished
6
23 T.Seenaiah 25 1.03 Unauthorised Demolished
27-
24 Manubolu Venkaiah 1,2,3,4,5, 2.32 Authorised Authorised
6,7,8,9
25 Manubolu Satheesh 28-2 0.92 Authorised Authorised
26 Manubolu Satheesh 28-1 1.06 Authorised Authorised
27 Muni Baskar 29- 0.95 Unauthorised
1,2,4,5 Demolished
28 Kalluru Prabakar 30-2A 1.52 Unauthorised Demolished
29 P.Baskar 30-2B 0.36 Unauthorised Demolished
31- W.P.No.14646/20
30 Malli Seenaiah 5A,5B,6 0.74 Unauthorised
21 d olished
A,6B
31 T.Seenaiah 31-1,2,7 0.51 Authorised Authorised
32- Unauthorised Demolished
32 Kalluru Prabakar 0.98
1,3,4,6,7
33 Kalluru Prabakar 32-5 023 Authorised Authorised
Page 96 of 140
34 Siva lcumar reddy 33-
6 0.99 Unauthorised Demolished
1A,1B2
35 Nunjala Madhu 33-1C 0.98 Unauthorised Demolished
36 Nunjala Madhu 34 0.16 Unauthorised Demolished
37 36-
Manubolu Satheesh 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished
12,1D,1E
38 Teruvayi Tirupalu 36-1A 0.41 Unauthorised Demolished
39 T.Seenaiah 37 0.32 Unauthorised Demolished
38-
40 T.Seenaiah 1,1A,2,3, 2.40 Unauthorised Demolished
3A,4,4A,
41 Sal Reddy 39-2,4A 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished
42 T.Seenaiah 39-4,4B1 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished
43 Sal Reddy 39-1 1.09 Authorised Authorised
44 Manubolu Satheesh 40 0.06 Demolished
Unauthorised
45 Manubolu Satheesh 41 W.P.No.14646/20
0.73 Unauthorised
21 demolished
46 Jaya Balaiah 41 W.P.No.14646/20
0.83 Unauthorised
21 demolished
47 Nunjala Madhu W.P.No.14646/20
41 0.56 Unauthorised
21 demolished
48 Manubolu Venkateswarlu W.P.No.14646/20
41 0.94 Unauthorised
21 demolished
49 Chiranjeevi W.P.No.14646/20
41 0.68 Unauthorised
21 demolished
50 W.P.No.14646/20
Beedu (Kalava) 41 0.22 Unauthorised
21 demolished
51 W.P.No.14646/20
Teruvayi Chandraiah 41 0.57 Unauthorised
21 demolished
52 Malli Seenaiah 13 0.66 Unauthorised Demolished
53 Kalluru Sesha reddy 49-1,2 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished
54 Parri Koteswaramma 50-2 0.43 Authorised Authorised
W.P.No.14646/20
55 Teruvayi Math 50-2A 0.13 Unauthorised
21 demolished
50-2B,
56 Teruvayi Chandraiah 1A,IB,1 0.19 Unauthorised Demolished
C
50- Demolished
57 Nunjala Madhu 0.12 Unauthorised
1,11,5,9
58 kaluva 59 0.12 Unauthorised Demolished
60-
59 Teruvayi Tirupalu 1,10,10A, 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished
4A,4C,7
Page 97 of 140
60 Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy 61
7 0.75 Unauthorised
W.P.No.14646/20
21 demolished
61 Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy W.P.No.14646/20
62 0.08 Unauthorised
21 demolished
62 1Calluru Prabakar reddy W.P.No.14646/20
63-2 0.40 Unauthorised
21 demolished
63 W.P.No.14646/20
Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy 63-2 0.74 Unauthorised
21 demolished
64 Duvvuru Madhu Reddy 64 0.05 Unauthorised Demolished
65 Duvvuru Madhu Reddy 65 1.43 Authorised Authorised
66 Krishna reddy 66 1.09 Unauthorised Demolished
67 Mallilcarjun 66 0.346 Unauthorised Demolished
68 Beedu 67 0.10 Unauthorised Demolished
69 Path Vijayalcumar 68-1,1B,4 0.29 Unauthorised Demolished
70 Path Koteswarattuna 68-2,3 0.56 Authorised Authorised
71 Kapuluru Van lakshmi 69-3 0.49 Authorised Authorised
72 Patti Koteswaranuna 69-1 0.28 Authorised Authorised
70-
73 Teruvayi Tirupalu 1,3A,3B, 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished
3D,3E,3F
74 Teruvayi Tirupalu 71-1,2 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished
75 Pith Chandramma 73 0.27 Unauthorised Demolished
76 Beedu ( No Culture) 75 0.30 Unauthorised Demolished
77 Beedu ( No Culture) 75 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished
78 ICaluva 76 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished
79 Parri Kotesvvaranuna 78-1,2 0.26 Authorised Authorised
80 Prabhakar Reddy 78 1.77 Unauthorised Demolished
81 Patti Koteswaranuna 79-3,4,5 0.75 Authorised Authorised
80-
82 Patti Ramanaiah 1.07 Unauthorised Demolished
7,8,9,10
94-
83 Geetha reddy 1.88 Unauthorised Demolished
1,3,4,7,8
84 95-
Kalluru Mallikarjun 0.67 Unauthorised Demolished
3A,6
85 Geetha reddy 105-5 0.17 Unauthorised Demolished
Page 98 of 140
86 Allipudi Babu 100
8 0.06 Unauthorised Demolished
87 Allipudi Babu 101 0.69 Unauthorised Demolished
88 Allipudi Babu 103-1,2A 0.47 Unauthorised Demolished
104-
89 Geetha reddy 0.38 Unauthorised Demolished
1B,2A
Dui olished
112112 -
90 Geetha reddy 1.13 Unauthorised W.P.No.16999 of
2
2021
91 Teruvayi Bujjamma 1-1 1.01 Unauthorised Demolished
92 Nunjala Sumathi 1-1A 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished
93 Malli Guravaiah 1-3 0.50 Unauthorised Demolished
94 Beedu ( No Culture) 1 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished
95 Pakam Chengaiah 1-1 0.61 Unauthorised Demolished
96 Venkatasubbaiah 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished
97 Pandi Kotaiah 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished
98 Putta Subrarnanyam 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished
99 Kalluru Sesha reddy 45-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished
Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in Padarthivari ICandrigaVillage:
S. Name of the Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or No Aquafarmers Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Konduru Krishna reddy 3,4 1.64 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-2 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 3 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-3 0.61 Unauthorised Demolished 4 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-1A 0.71 Unauthorised Demolished 5 Beedu (No Culture) 6 0.97 Unauthorised Demolished 6 Beedu (No Culture) 8 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 7 Beedu (No Culture) 10 2.08 Unauthorised Demolished Page 99 of 140 11- 9 8 Mohan kumar 0.71 Unauthorised Demolished 1A„11-2 9 Mohan kumar 12-3,4,5 0.68 Authorised Authorised WP No:10 Mohan kumar 13- 3342/2020
0.94 Unauthorised 3,2,5,1A pending at HHC AP 11 Mohan kumar 13-2,3 0.15 Authorised Authorised 12 Mohan kumar 15-4D 15-6 ' 2.53 Authorised Authorised Parwath Reddy 16- WP No:
13 Venlcataramana Reddy 2A,16- 0.70 Unauthorised 14554/2021
2B demolished
14 Valipi Seenaiah 17-2C,2B 0.85 Authorised Authorised
WP No:
15 Valipi Seenaiah 18-2B1 0.99 Unauthorised 3342/2020
pending at HHC
AP
16 Valipi Seenaiah 18-
0.25 Authorised Authorised
2A,2A2
WP No:
17 Valipi Seenaiah 3342/2020
19 0.94 Unauthorised
pending at HHC
AP
18 Valipi Seenaiah 20-1,2 1.19 Authorised Authorised
19 Valipi Seenaiah 21-5,6 0.75 Authorised Authorised
WP No:
20 Valipi Seenaiah 21 0.93 Unauthorised 14554/2021
demolished
WP No:
22- 1.13 Unauthorised 14554/2021
21 Valipi Seenaiah
1,2,3,4,5 demolished
22 Valipi Seenaiah 23-2 0.72 Authorised Authorised
Parwath Reddy 23-2 0.61 Authorised Authorised
23
Venkatakrishna Reddy
24 Valipi Seenaiah 23-1 1.12 Authorised Authorised
25 Valipi Seenaiah 24 0.36 Unauthorised Demolished
26 Valipi Seenaiah 25 0.08 Unauthorised Demolished
Page 100 of 140
10
27 Valipi Seenaiah 27-P1,P2 1.01 Authorised Authorised
27- WP No:
28 Valipi Seenaiah 1,3,4,5, 3.35 Unauthorised 13368/2021
6,8,9,2 demolished
Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in RanganadhapuramVillage:
S. Name of the Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or No Aquafamiers Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Math Siva Reddy 78-1,2 4.35 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Marri Siva Reddy 79-B 0.49 Unauthorised Demolished 3 Math Siva Reddy 81-3,4 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 4 Math Siva Reddy 79-1,2 0.78 Unauthorised Demolished 5 Nalajam Manjula 79 0.43 Unauthorised Demolished 6 Nalajam Syarnala 79 0.30 Unauthorised Demolished 7 Poluru Bujjamma 79 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 8 Pulasa Kotaiah 100 3.79 Unauthorised Demolished 9 Pulasa Kotaiah 80 1.42 Unauthorised Demolished 10 Ramanaiah 91 4.10 Unauthorised Demolished 11 Ramanaiah 97 1.56 Unauthorised Demolished 12 Sivalanki Sudhakar 97 8.10 Unauthorised Demolished WP No:
13 Balaji 90 1.56 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished WP No:
14 Balaji 92 0.49 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished WP No:
15 Gudur Subba rao 92 2.39 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished WP No:
16 Gudur Subba rao 89-2,3,4 3.11 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished 17 Gopala Krishna 89-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 18 Gopala Krishna 82-1,2 1.52 Unauthorised Demolished WP No:
19 Gudur Subba rao 88 3.66 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished Page 101 of 140 20 Purnamalli 11 Venkatasubbaiah 87 1.99 Unauthorised Demolished 21 Beedu 93 0.34 Unauthorised Demolished 22 Seshu Reddy 111 0.95 Unauthorised Demolished 23 Seshu Reddy 107-1,2 2.31 Unauthorised Demolished 24 Seshu Reddy 108 0.28 Unauthorised Demolished 25 Valipi Seenaiah 10,10-2 0.66 Unauthorised Demolished 26 Valipi Seenaiah 9-2,3 1.01 Unauthorised Demolished 27 Valipi Seenaiah 11-1,2,3 1.40 Unauthorised Demolished 28 Valipi Seenaiah 12 1.04 Unauthorised Demolished 29 Valipi Seenaiah 7 0.53 Unauthorised Demolished 30 Valipi Seenaiah 6-1,3,7 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished 31 Bala Krishna Reddy 84 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 32 M.Ravana Reddy 84 0.76 Unauthorised Demolished Maram Reddy WP No:
33 84-1 3.64 Authorised 13652/2021and
Chiranjeevi reddy
14983/2021
Maram Reddy WP No:
34 84-1A 1.82 Authorised 13652/2021and
Kasthur reddy
14983/2021
Kami reddy 84-1A, WP No:
35 182 Authorised 13652/2021and
Chandra Reddy IP-2, 2-2 -
14983/2021
Purnamalli WP No:
36 85 2.57 Unauthorised 13615/2021
Venkatasubbaiah
demolished
37 Bala Krishna Reddy 83-1,2,4 1.72 Unauthorised Demolished
Purnamalli WP No:
38Venkatasubbaiah 86 3.38 Unauthorised 13615/2021
demolished
Maram Reddy WP No:
39 85 3.17 Authorised 15162/2021
Chiranjeevi reddy
Pending at HHC
40 Valipi Seenaiah 1-1 1.11 Unauthorised Demolished
The Hon'ble NGT directed the APPCB & the Joint Committee to awertain as to whether those units who have obtained necessary permission, have committed any violations of the conditions imposed on account of which pollution has been caused. In this regard it is to submit that no such case has been noticed and therefore the question of compensation to be realised may not arise.Page 102 of 140 12
V. Status of the Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh filed against demolition of the illegal shrimp tanks:
The Hon'ble NGT directed the APPCB to submit a report regarding the nature of Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition order passed and the present stage of the Writ Petition. In this regard, it is to submit that the Fisheries Department has issued the demolition Orders & some of the aqua farmers have approached the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The status of the writ petitions obtained from the Fisheries Department is submitted below:
No of Name of
S.No WP No Name of petitioner Petition Sy Nos Extent
m Heet the Present status
ers Village
Kanuru Ramanaiah 13/5,13/1
S/o Alluraiah A,19,A27
3342 Claimalapudi Vi & /7,29/2,1 Padharthi
1 Of Valcadu Mandal & 07 8/2/B2,27 5.628 Pending
2020 ( 6) others /5,27/8,2 vari at HHC AP
Kandriga
7/6,19,27
/9
Smt Kanuru Santhi 19427/7,
W/o sudhakar 29/2,18/2
13368 Cheemalapudi /B2,27/5,
. Padbarthi
2 of Village Vakadu 27/8,27-
Mandal & (6) others 07 4.528 vani demolished
2021 6,13-
5,13- Kandriga
1A,19,27/
9
Darsi Venkata
subbaRao Sto 92,88,89-
13615 2,89-
3 of Tirupathayya Bazar Ranganat
Street Mallam 04 3,85,86,8 8.912 demolished
2021 7,90,92,8 hapuram
Chittamur Mandal &
(3) others 5
Kann Reddy Kasturi Additional
Reddy S/o Jayarmi Explanation
Reddy Thinunareddi submitted
13652 Vagu Pellakur 84- 1A, within
4 of Mandal & (2) others 84- !A, 6.188 Ranganat stipulated
03
2021 1P-2, 2- hapuram time as per
2, 84-1 Court orders
and consi-
dered their
request
14232 Theegal Suresh Babu 1, 3-P,
5 S/o Krishnaiah 9-A Pittavani
of 01 ' 536 demolished
2021 Sangam van Street 9-A3, 9- Palli
Kota Mandal B. 9-C
Parvatha reddy 16-
Venkataramana 2A,16-
Reddy S/o Narayaria 2B,23-
Reddy Mallam Vi & 2,17-
14554 cbittamur (M) & ( 6 ) 2A,2I- Padharthi
6 of others 07 4,15- 6.44 vani demolished
2021 4A,21- Kandriga
1,15-
4C,21-
3,15-
6,22-
Page 103 of 140
13 3,22-
2,21-2
9-P,8-
Mali Sreenivasulu 1,2,14-1,
S/o Kondaiah 14-2,31-
Venkannapalem Kota 5A,5B,
7 14646 Mandal & ( 9) others 6A,6B,13 Pittavani
of 2021 10 14.30 demolished
,3,78,35- palli
1,2,3, 41,
41,61,62,
63-2,50-
2A
Maram Reddy Additional
Chiranjeevi Reddy Explanation
S/o Narayana Reddy submitted
14983 Agraharapeta within
Naidupeta Mandal & 84-1, 84-
8 of 03 1A1P- 3.64 Ranganat stipulated
2021 (2) others hapuram time as per
2,2-2,29/
Court orders
and
considered
their request
Penumalli Venkata
Subbaiah S/o 85, 86
15162 Subralunanyam 87,
9 03 92,88,89- 7.94 Ranganat Pending
of 2021 Vallipuram Mallam hapuram at HHC AP
Chittamur Mandal & 2,89-
(2) others 3,90,92
Petti Praveen Kumar 112/2,
16999 S/o Rama.chandraiah, 84/8, Pittuvani
10 of Pittuvanipalli (V), 01 2.23
2021 chimmur (m) 98/12, palli demolished
98/8
CC.No. Theegal Suresh Babu Petitioner
1869 of S/o Krishnaiah 1, 3-P, filed contempt
11 2021 Sangam van Street 9-A, Pittuvani case against
in W.P Kota Mandal 01 5.76
9-A3, 9- palli respondents
No. B. 9-C for
14232, demolition.
TOTAL 46 65.566
VI. Status of water quality:
APPCB collected the water samples from the waterbodies in the area including Mallam tank. The values indicate that there is an improvement in the water quality. Extract of the analysis results is submitted below:
Water sample collected from Royyala Vagu near Tagetamma temple 27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 PH 7.0 6.9 8.1 8.0 7.1 7.4 7.5 EC 15120 23100 27700 5710 2990 880 801 TSS 36 12 12 10 10 24 24 TDS 9007 14322 17452 3655 1945 602 540 Page 104 of 140 14 Water sample collected from Palamadugu vagu, Pittuvanipalli (V) 27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 pH 7.1 6.8 8.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 EC 19800 21630 21190 6240 1175 1320 1205 TSS 20 10 10 12 12 20 38 TDS 11880 13194 13350 3994 760 790 816 Water sample collected from Mallam tank at GD - Nidigurthy road,Thunadilu 27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 pH -- 7.2 8.3 7.9 7.4 7.2 7.6 EC -- 8470 9470 850 1258 764 740 TSS -- 18 16 8 10 16 29 TDS -- 5336 5967 536 792 450 496 Water sample collected from MaIlam tank near Nagurkomma temple, Jalagarthipalem 27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.102021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 pH - 7.3 8.3 8.4 73 7.2 7.6 EC -- 8850 6920 981 119 523 554 TSS - 16 14 10 10 28 16 TDS -- 5487 4498 618 716 310 334 Water sample collected from Etigattu Kalava, Pedavstrthivari Kandriga (V) 27.05.2021 25.062021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 pH 7.5 7.7 8.2 8.2 7.7 8.1 7.8 EC 15630 19980 11560 1742 1076 790 887 TSS 24 16 10 12 16 42 42 TDS 9378 12587 7398 1098 688 490 608 Water sample collected from Pull Kaluvst, near Pittuvani alli 27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022 pH 7.5 7.4 8.3 8.3 7.4 T1 7.7 EC 7150 8840 8170 1796 21840 810 886 TSS 22 18 16 16 12 40 48 TDS 4647 5569 5148 119 14196 520 602 Water sample collected from Pali Kaluva, Muttumbakam.
27.05.2021 25.06.2021 31.08.2021 14.09.2021 29.10.2021 16.12.2021 01.01.2022
pH - 7.0 8.2 8.3 7.9 7.1 7.8
EC - 7970 7150 1428 1702 645 657
TSS -- 12 8 12 14 24 37
TDS -- 4861 4570 915 1459 398 448
Note: All values are expressed in mg/It except pH VII. Status of paddy yield in Pittuvanipalli (V), Padarthivari Kandriga(v) & Ranganadhapuram(v), atittamuru(M), SPSR Nellore District.
Agriculture department has conducted soil tests in Pittivanipalli, Padartivarikandriga and Ranganadapuram villages of Chittamur Mandal and the results indicate that the pH value as well Page 105 of 140 15 as EC value are within the range. Hence there will be no loss to the fields in the said areas of Chittamur Mandal and also there is no yield loss to the paddy fields in the said villages. The analysis values are submitted below:
SURVEY ORGANIC HCL.REACTION PH EC CARBON NITROGEN PHOSPHORUS POTASSIUM SULPHUR EXTENT I NO ro u.1 VALUE RANGE VALUE (1.1 VALUE P4 VALUE C.Q7 C.4T 0 z0 0 0 _ _ > 5 5 g SLIGHTLY 88-1 0.64 F 7.7 ALKALINE 0.4 NORMAL 035 Low 615 High II Low 281 Medium 127 HIGH MODERATELY 70-3F 0.34 F 8.1 ALKALINE 0.6 NORMAL 0.02 Low 263 Low 36 High 161 Medium 5)6 HIGH MODERATELY 107-3 0.16 F 8 ALKALINE 0.6 NORMAL 038 Low 188 Low 53 High 214 Medium 546 HIGH MODERATELY 105-2 032 F 8.1 ALKALINE 03 NORMAL 0.26 Low 163 Low 25 Medium 168 Medium 516 HIGH MODERATELY 112 1.00 F 8.1 ALKALINE 0.5 NORMAL 035 Low 50 Low 44 High 221 Medium 559 HIGH MODERATELY 7-IB 0.87 F 83 ALKALINE 0.6 NORMAL 0.87 High 113 Low 44 High 127 Medium 475 HIGH 44571 0.31 F 6.9 NEUTRAL I NORMAL 1.08 High 201 Low 53 High 275 Medium 599 HIGH 10-Apr 0.89 F 6.8 NEUTRAL 0.8 NORMAL 135 High 138 Low 32 High 141 Medium 599 HIGH 15-46 0.8 F 7 NEUTRAL 0.8 NORMAL 0.73 Medium 213 Low 78 High 221 Medium 559 HIGH 9-1B 2.98 F 72 NEUTRAL 1 NORMAL 125 High 50 Low 61 High 147 Medium 140 HIGH SLIGHTLY 103-1 2.68 F 7.8 ALKALINE 05 NORMAL 0.9 High 50 Low 44 High 214 Medium 183 HIGH 43-1c 0.34 F 6.4 ACIDIC 0.6 NORMAL 1.14 High 188 Low _97 High 147 Medium 437 HIGH 41 0.74 F 7.2 NEUTRAL 0.6 NORMAL 1.51 High 113 Low 57 High 201 Medium 74 HIGH SLIGHTLY 6-4 0A2 F 7.6 ALKALINE 0.5 NORMAL 1.16 High 63 bow 13 Medium 174 Medium 371 HIGH SLIGHTLY 48-1 e 034 F 7.7 ALKALINE 0.4 NORMAL 1.34 High 125 Lew 65 High 201 Medium 516 HIGH In view of the above results, it clearly indicates that the agricultural fields are fit for cultivationof the paddy& there is no reduction of yield of paddy in the subjected areas.
kvoh M. Nageswara Rao, Ch. Rajasekhar K. Arm Ida, - A. on Xavier, Joint Director of EE, A.P. Pollution Senior Scientist (Agro) Director eclmical) Fisheries, Control Board, & Head, Saline Water Coastal Aquaculture SPSR Nellore SPSR Nellore Scheme, Bapatla Authority, Chennai V. Mubali Krishna Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur,SPSR Nellore.
Page 106 of 14048. The State Pollution Control Board also filed the report dated 31.03.2022, e- filed on 28.04.2022 which reads as follows:-
"I. Preamble In the matter of OA Nos. 114-122/2020, in compliance to Hon‟ble National Green Tribunal(NGT)vide Orders dated 22.07.2020 constituted the Joint Committee to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found. Accordingly, the Committee submitted the report to the Hon‟ble NGT and the subsequently, un- authorized aqua ponds in the area are demolished in the area. The Hon‟ble NGT reviewed the case on 31.01.2022 and directed to file a report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and present yield; ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil; details of the demolition done with survey numbers; ascertain compliance of the permitted and operating units & submit the status of the pending writ petitions in the Hon‟ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Further, Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Kota (V&M), Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units, damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. The Hon‟ble NGT directed consider that aspect and to file a report.
II. Hon'ble NGT Order dated 31.01.2022:
Post submission of committee report, Hon‟ble NGT vide order dated 31.01.2022 has directed as follows: "
11. In the meantime, we have also received a letter petition from Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Survey Nos.641/2, 643/1 & 645/2 Kota Village, Kota Mandal of Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. He was also produced certain photographs showing the nature of damage cause. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal is directed to consider that aspect as well and to file a report in this regard.
12. The committee is also directed to file a detailed report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and what is the present yield that has been obtained by them or whether such pollution has prevented from doing the agricultural activity and if that be the case what is the amount of compensation that has to be imposed.
13. The above officials are directed to ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil and what is the nature of remediation to be done for the purpose of restoring he contamination, if any, to be caused to the soil and who are responsible for the same depending upon the pro-rata contribution agriculture lands.
Page 107 of 140I. Preamble In the matter of OA Nos. 114-122/2020, in compliance to Hon'ble National Green Tribunal(NGT)vide Orders dated 22.07.2020 constituted the Joint Committee to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found. Accordingly, the Committee submitted the report to the Hon'ble NGT and the subsequently, un- authorized aqua ponds in the area are demolished in the area.
The Hon'ble NGT reviewed the case on 31.01.2022 and directed to file a report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and present yield; ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil; details of the demolition done with survey numbers; ascertain compliance of the permitted and operating units & submit the status of the pending writ petitions in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
Further, Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Kota (V&M), Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units, damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. The Hon'ble NGT directed consider that aspect and to file a report.
II. Hon'ble NGT Order dated 31.01.2022:
Post submission of committee report, Hon'ble NGT vide order dated 31.01.2022 has directed as follows:
"
11. In the meantime, we have also received a letter petition from Mr. B. Ravindra Reddy whose land is situated in Survey Nos.641/2, 643/1 & 645/2 Kota Village, Kota Mandal of Nellore District stating that on account of the activities committed by the shrimp culture units damage has been caused to his property, and he is not able to do with cultivation. He was also produced certain photographs showing the nature of damage cause. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal is directed to consider that aspect as well and to file a report in this regard.
12. The committee is also directed to file a detailed report showing the details of the nature of yield obtained by the applicants before these shrimp culture units have been established in those agriculture lands and what is the present yield that has been obtained by them or whether such pollution has prevented from doing the agricultural activity and if that be the case what is the amount of compensation that has to be imposed.
13. The above officials are directed to ascertain the nature of damage caused to the soil and what is the nature of remediation to be done for the purpose of restoring he contamination, if any, to be caused to the soil and who are responsible for the same depending upon the pro- rata contribution made by the alleged violators causing pollution to the neighbouring agriculture lands.
Page 108 of 14014. The learned counsel appearing for Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) also wanted some time to submit their further details of the demolition done with survey numbers and also the report about the details furnished by the counsel appearing for the applicant regarding survey numbers where such illegal activities are still continuing after making further verifications. These things can also be considered by the Joint Committee while submitting their further report.
The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) as well as the Joint Committee are directed to ascertain as to whether those units who have obtained necessary permission, have committed any violations of the conditions imposed on account of which pollution has been caused. If that be the case what is the amount of compensation to be realised from them These aspects were also not answered by the committee while submitting their either in the present report or in the earlier reports filed. So these aspects will also have to be considered by them while submitting their further report.
15. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) is also directed to submit a report regarding the nature of Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition order passed and the present stage of the Writ Petition as well while submitting their further report to be filed as directed."
A copy of the Order dt: 31.01.2022 is herewith attached as annexure - I for kind perusal.
In compliance to Hon'ble NGT order, the joint committee meeting held on 04.03.2022 and the committee inspected the Kota and Mallam areas. The Committee inspected the aqua ponds located at the Kota area on 09.03.2022 and also the Chittamuru area on 08.03.2022, where the illegal aqua ponds are demolished. APPCB is also one of the member in the joint committee. Further the APPCB is continuing the monitoring of the water quality in the water bodies in the Mallam tank area.
III. Status of demolition of the illegal shrimp tanks:
The Fisheries Department has demolished the unauthorized ponds which are not involved in court cases in Pittuvanipalli (V), Padarthivari Kandriga (v) &Ranganadhapuram(v) Chittamuru(M), SPSR Nellore District.
Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in Pittuvanipalli Village.
S. Name of the Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or No Aquafarmers Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Konduru Baskar 3 0.95 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Chintha Reddy 3 0.79 Unauthorised Demolished Parandhama Reddy Page 109 of 140 3 4-1,2 1.58 Unauthorised Demolished Chintha reddy Kota reddy 4 Puchalapalli 5-1,2,3 1.74 Unauthorised Demolished Sudarshanamma 5 Puchalapalli 6 0.13 Unauthorised Demolished Sudarshanamma 6 Malli Seenaiah 8-1,2 0.89 Unauthorised Demolished demolished 7 Malli Seenaiah 9-P 1.80 Unauthorised No:14232/2021 9- Demolished 8 Malli Seenaiah A,A3,B, 3.22 Authorised No:14232/2021 C 9 Pitti Hanumanthaiah 10 0.26 Unauthorised Demolished 10 Devalayama Land 11 0.33 Unauthorised Demolished 11 Malli Seenaiah 12 1.85 Authorised Authorised 12 Manubolu Satheesh 14-3 1.32 Authorised Authorised W.P.No.14646 13 Malli Seenaiah 14-1,2 1.75 Unauthorised /2021 demolished 14 Manubolu Sailaja 15 1.02 Authorised Authorised 15 Manubolu Venkaiah 17-1,2 0.65 Authorised Authorised 16 Kaluva 19 0.12 Unauthorised Demolished 17 Manubolu Satheesh 20-1,3 1.32 Unauthorised Demolished 20-1A, 18 Rangaiah 1.29 Unauthorised Demolished 2B 19 Krishna reddy 21 1.47 Unauthorised Demolished 22- 20 Teruvayi Tirupalu 1.19 Unauthorised Demolished 1A,2,3 23- 21 Rangaiah 1,2,5,6,8, 2.03 Unauthorised Demolished 9 24- 22 P Chandraiah 1,2,3,4,5, 1.77 Unauthorised Demolished 6 23 T.Seenaiah 25 1.03 Unauthorised Demolished 27- 24 Manubolu Venkaiah 1,2,3,4,5, 2.32 Authorised Authorised 6,7,8,9 25 Manubolu Satheesh 28-2 0.92 Authorised Authorised 26 Manubolu Satheesh 28-1 1.06 Authorised Authorised Page 110 of 140 29- 27 Muni Baskar 0.95 Unauthorised Demolished 1,2,4,5 28 Kalluru Prabakar 30-2A 1.52 Unauthorised Demolished 29 P.Baskar 30-2B 0.36 Unauthorised Demolished 31- W.P.No.14646/20 30 Malli Seenaiah 5A,5B,6 0.74 Unauthorised 21 demolished A,6B 31 T.Seenaiah 31-1,2,7 0.51 Authorised Authorised 32- 32 Kalluru Prabakar 0.98 Unauthorised Demolished 1,3,4,6,7 33 Kalluru Prabakar 32-5 0.23 Authorised Authorised 33- 34 Siva kumar reddy 0.99 Unauthorised Demolished 1A,1B2 35 Nunjala Madhu 33-1C 0.98 Unauthorised Demolished 36 Nunjala Madhu 34 0.16 Unauthorised Demolished 36- 37 Manubolu Satheesh 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 12,1D,1E 38 Teruvayi Tirupalu 36-1A 0.41 Unauthorised Demolished 39 T.Seenaiah 37 0.32 Unauthorised Demolished 38- 40 T.Seenaiah 1,1A,2,3, 2.40 Unauthorised Demolished 3A,4,4A, 41 Sai Reddy 39-2,4A 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished 42 T.Seenaiah 39-4,4B1 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished 43 Sai Reddy 39-1 1.09 Authorised Authorised Demolished 44 Manubolu Satheesh 40 0.06 Unauthorised W.P.No.14646/20 45 Manubolu Satheesh 41 0.73 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 46 Jaya Balaiah 41 0.83 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 47 Nunjala Madhu 41 0.56 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 48 Manubolu Venkateswarlu 41 0.94 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 49 Chiranjeevi 41 0.68 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 50 Beedu (Kalava) 41 0.22 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 51 Teruvayi Chandraiah 41 0.57 Unauthorised 21 demolished 52 Malli Seenaiah 13 0.66 Unauthorised Demolished Page 111 of 140 53 Kalluru Sesha reddy 49-1,2 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished 54 Parri Koteswaramma 50-2 0.43 Authorised Authorised W.P.No.14646/20 55 Teruvayi Mani 50-2A 0.13 Unauthorised 21 demolished 50-2B, 56 Teruvayi Chandraiah 1A,1B,1 0.19 Unauthorised Demolished C 50- 57 Nunjala Madhu 0.12 Unauthorised Demolished 1,11,5,9 58 kaluva 59 0.12 Unauthorised Demolished 60- 59 Teruvayi Tirupalu 1,10,10A, 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 4A,4C,7 W.P.No.14646/20 60 Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy 61 0.75 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 61 Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy 62 0.08 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 62 Kalluru Prabakar reddy 63-2 0.40 Unauthorised 21 demolished W.P.No.14646/20 63 Duvvuru Dayakar Reddy 63-2 0.74 Unauthorised 21 demolished 64 Duvvuru Madhu Reddy 64 0.05 Unauthorised Demolished 65 Duvvuru Madhu Reddy 65 1.43 Authorised Authorised 66 Krishna reddy 66 1.09 Unauthorised Demolished 67 Mallikarjun 66 0.346 Unauthorised Demolished 68 Beedu 67 0.10 Unauthorised Demolished 69 Parri Vijayakumar 68-1,1B,4 0.29 Unauthorised Demolished 70 Parri Koteswaramma 68-2,3 0.56 Authorised Authorised 71 Kapuluru Vara lakshmi 69-3 0.49 Authorised Authorised 72 Parri Koteswaramma 69-1 0.28 Authorised Authorised 70- 73 Teruvayi Tirupalu 1,3A,3B, 0.85 Unauthorised Demolished 3D,3E,3F 74 Teruvayi Tirupalu 71-1,2 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished 75 Pitti Chandramma 73 0.27 Unauthorised Demolished 76 Beedu ( No Culture) 75 0.30 Unauthorised Demolished 77 Beedu ( No Culture) 75 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished 78 Kaluva 76 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished Page 112 of 140 79 Parri Koteswaramma 78-1,2 0.26 Authorised Authorised 80 Prabhakar Reddy 78 1.77 Unauthorised Demolished 81 Parri Koteswaramma 79-3,4,5 0.75 Authorised Authorised 80- 82 Parri Ramanaiah 1.07 Unauthorised Demolished 7,8,9,10 94- 83 Geetha reddy 1.88 Unauthorised Demolished 1,3,4,7,8 95- 84 Kalluru Mallikarjun 0.67 Unauthorised Demolished 3,4,5A,6 85 Geetha reddy 105-5 0.17 Unauthorised Demolished 86 Allipudi Babu 100 0.06 Unauthorised Demolished 87 Allipudi Babu 101 0.69 Unauthorised Demolished 88 Allipudi Babu 103-1,2A 0.47 Unauthorised Demolished 104- 89 Geetha reddy 0.38 Unauthorised Demolished 1B,2A Demolished 112,112- 90 Geetha reddy 1.13 Unauthorised W.P.No.16999 of 2 2021 91 Teruvayi Bujjamma 1-1 1.01 Unauthorised Demolished 92 Nunjala Sumathi 1-1A 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 93 Malli Guravaiah 1-3 0.50 Unauthorised Demolished 94 Beedu ( No Culture) 1 0.45 Unauthorised Demolished 95 Pakam Chengaiah 1-1 0.61 Unauthorised Demolished 96 Venkatasubbaiah 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 97 Pandi Kotaiah 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 98 Putta Subramanyam 1-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 99 Kalluru Sesha reddy 45-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in Padarthivari KandrigaVillage:
S. Name of the Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or No Aquafarmers Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Konduru Krishna reddy 3,4 1.64 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-2 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished Page 113 of 140 3 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-3 0.61 Unauthorised Demolished 4 Konduru Krishna reddy 5-1A 0.71 Unauthorised Demolished 5 Beedu (No Culture) 6 0.97 Unauthorised Demolished 6 Beedu (No Culture) 8 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 7 Beedu (No Culture) 10 2.08 Unauthorised Demolished 11- 8 Mohan kumar 0.71 Unauthorised Demolished 1A,,11-2 9 Mohan kumar 12-3,4,5 0.68 Authorised Authorised WP No:
13- 3342/2020 10 Mohan kumar 0.94 Unauthorised 3,2,5,1A pending at HHC AP 11 Mohan kumar 13-2,3 0.15 Authorised Authorised 15-4D, 12 Mohan kumar 2.53 Authorised Authorised 15-6 16- WP No: Parwath Reddy 13 2A,16- 0.70 Unauthorised 14554/2021 Venkataramana Reddy 2B demolished 14 Valipi Seenaiah 17-2C,2B 0.85 Authorised Authorised WP No: 3342/2020 15 Valipi Seenaiah 18-2B1 0.99 Unauthorised pending at HHC AP 18- 16 Valipi Seenaiah 0.25 Authorised Authorised 2A,2A2 WP No: 3342/2020 17 Valipi Seenaiah 19 0.94 Unauthorised pending at HHC AP 18 Valipi Seenaiah 20-1,2 1.19 Authorised Authorised 19 Valipi Seenaiah 21-5,6 0.75 Authorised Authorised WP No: 20 Valipi Seenaiah 21 0.93 Unauthorised 14554/2021 demolished WP No: 22- 21 Valipi Seenaiah 1.13 Unauthorised 14554/2021 1,2,3,4,5 demolished Page 114 of 140 22 Valipi Seenaiah 23-2 0.72 Authorised Authorised Parwath Reddy 23 23-2 0.61 Authorised Authorised Venkatakrishna Reddy 24 Valipi Seenaiah 23-1 1.12 Authorised Authorised 25 Valipi Seenaiah 24 0.36 Unauthorised Demolished 26 Valipi Seenaiah 25 0.08 Unauthorised Demolished 27 Valipi Seenaiah 27-P1,P2 1.01 Authorised Authorised 27- WP No: 28 Valipi Seenaiah 1,3,4,5, 3.35 Unauthorised 13368/2021 6,8,9,2 demolished
Status of demolition of illegal shrimp tanks in RanganadhapuramVillage:
S. Name of the Survey Extent Authorised/ Demolished or No Aquafarmers Numbers in Ha Unauthorized Not Demolished 1 Marri Siva Reddy 78-1,2 4.35 Unauthorised Demolished 2 Marri Siva Reddy 79-B 0.49 Unauthorised Demolished 3 Marri Siva Reddy 81-3,4 1.21 Unauthorised Demolished 4 Marri Siva Reddy 79-1,2 0.78 Unauthorised Demolished 5 Nalajam Manjula 79 0.43 Unauthorised Demolished 6 Nalajam Syamala 79 0.30 Unauthorised Demolished 7 Poluru Bujjamma 79 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 8 Pulasa Kotaiah 100 3.79 Unauthorised Demolished 9 Pulasa Kotaiah 80 1.42 Unauthorised Demolished 10 Ramanaiah 91 4.10 Unauthorised Demolished 11 Ramanaiah 97 1.56 Unauthorised Demolished 12 Sivalanki Sudhakar 97 8.10 Unauthorised Demolished WP No:
13 Balaji 90 1.56 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished Page 115 of 140 WP No:
14 Balaji 92 0.49 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished WP No:
15 Gudur Subba rao 92 2.39 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished WP No:
16 Gudur Subba rao 89-2,3,4 3.11 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished 17 Gopala Krishna 89-1 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished 18 Gopala Krishna 82-1,2 1.52 Unauthorised Demolished WP No:
19 Gudur Subba rao 88 3.66 Unauthorised 13615/2021 demolished Purnamalli 20 87 1.99 Unauthorised Demolished Venkatasubbaiah 21 Beedu 93 0.34 Unauthorised Demolished 22 Seshu Reddy 111 0.95 Unauthorised Demolished 23 Seshu Reddy 107-1,2 2.31 Unauthorised Demolished 24 Seshu Reddy 108 0.28 Unauthorised Demolished 25 Valipi Seenaiah 10,10-2 0.66 Unauthorised Demolished 26 Valipi Seenaiah 9-2,3 1.01 Unauthorised Demolished 27 Valipi Seenaiah 11-1,2,3 1.40 Unauthorised Demolished 28 Valipi Seenaiah 12 1.04 Unauthorised Demolished 29 Valipi Seenaiah 7 0.53 Unauthorised Demolished 30 Valipi Seenaiah 6-1,3,7 0.18 Unauthorised Demolished Bala Krishna 31 84 0.40 Unauthorised Demolished Reddy 32 M.Ravana Reddy 84 0.76 Unauthorised Demolished WP No:
Maram Reddy 33 84-1 3.64 Authorised 13652/2021and Chiranjeevi reddy 14983/2021 WP No:
Maram Reddy 34 84-1A 1.82 Authorised 13652/2021and Kasthur reddy 14983/2021 WP No:
Kami reddy 84-1A,
35 1.82 Authorised 13652/2021and
Chandra Reddy 1P-2, 2-2
14983/2021
WP No:
Purnamalli
36 85 2.57 Unauthorised 13615/2021
Venkatasubbaiah
demolished
Page 116 of 140
Bala Krishna
37 83-1,2,4 1.72 Unauthorised Demolished
Reddy
WP No:
Purnamalli
38 86 3.38 Unauthorised 13615/2021
Venkatasubbaiah
demolished
WP No:
Maram Reddy
39 85 3.17 Authorised 15162/2021
Chiranjeevi reddy
Pending at HHC
40 Valipi Seenaiah 1-1 1.11 Unauthorised Demolished
The Hon'ble NGT directed the APPCB & the Joint Committee to ascertain as to whether those units who have obtained necessary permission, have committed any violations of the conditions imposed on account of which pollution has been caused. In this regard it is to submit that no such case has been noticed and therefore the question of compensation to be realised may not arise.
IV. Status of the Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh filed against demolition of the illegal shrimp tanks:
The Hon'ble NGT directed the APPCB to submit a report regarding the nature of Writ Petitions pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition order passed and the present stage of the Writ Petition. In this regard, it is to submit that the Fisheries Department has issued the demolition Orders & some of the aqua farmers have approached the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The status of the writ petitions obtained from the Fisheries Department is submitted below:
No of Name of
Extent Present
S.No WP No Name of petitioner Petition Sy Nos the
in Hect status
ers Village
Kanuru Ramanaiah 13/5,13/1
S/o Alluraiah A,19,A27
3342 Chimalapudi Vi & /7,29/2,1 Padharthi
Pending at
1 of Vakadu Mandal & 07 8/2/B2,27 5.628 vari
HHC AP
2020 ( 6) others /5,27/8,2 Kandriga
7/6,19,27
/9
Smt Kanuru Santhi 19,A27/7,
W/o sudhakar 29/2,18/2
Cheemalapudi /B2,27/5,
13368 Padharthi
Village Vakadu 27/8,27-
2 of 07 4.528 vari Demolished
Mandal & (6) others 6,13-
2021 Kandriga
5,13-
1A,19,27/
9
Darsi Venkata
subbaRao S/o 92,88,89-
13615 Tirupathayya Bazar 2,89-
Ranganat
3 of Street Mallam 04 3,85,86,8 8.912 Demolished
hapuram
2021 Chittamur Mandal & 7,90,92,8
(3) others 5
Page 117 of 140
Kami Reddy Kasturi Additional
Reddy S/o Jayarmi Expla- nation
Reddy Thimmareddi submitted
Vagu Pellakur 84- 1A, within
13652
Mandal & (2) others 84- !A, Ranganat stipulated
4 of 03 6.188
1P-2, 2- hapuram time as per
2021
2, 84-1 Court orders
and consi-
dered their
request
Theegal Suresh Babu 1, 3-P,
14232
S/o Krishnaiah 9-A, Pittavani
5 of 01 5.76 demolished
Sangam vari Street 9-A3, 9- palli
2021
Kota Mandal B. 9-C
Parvatha reddy 16-
Venkataramana 2A,16-
Reddy S/o Narayana 2B,23-
Reddy Mallam Vi & 2,17-
chittamur (M) & ( 6 ) 2A,21-
14554 others 4,15- Padharthi
6 of 07 4A,21- 6.44 vari demolished
2021 1,15- Kandriga
4C,21-
3,15-
6,22-
3,22-
2,21-2
9-P,8-
Malli Sreenivasulu 1,2,14-1,
S/o Kondaiah 14-2,31-
Venkannapalem Kota 5A,5B,
14646 Mandal & ( 9) others 6A,6B,13 Pittavani
7 10 14.30 demolished
of 2021 ,3,78,35- palli
1,2,3, 41,
41,61,62,
63-2,50-
2A
Maram Reddy Additional
Chiranjeevi Reddy Explanation
S/o Narayana Reddy submitted
Agraharapeta within
14983 84-1, 84-
Naidupeta Mandal & Ranganat stipulated
8 of 03 1A1P- 3.64
(2) others hapuram time as per
2021 2,2-2,29/
Court orders
and
considered
their request
Penumalli Venkata
85, 86
Subbaiah S/o
87,
15162 Subrahmanyam Ranganat Pending at
9 03 92,88,89- 7.94
of 2021 Vallipuram Mallam hapuram HHC AP
2,89-
Chittamur Mandal &
3,90,92
(2) others
Petti Praveen Kumar 112/2,
16999 S/o Ramachandraiah, 84/8, Pittuvani
10 of Pittuvanipalli (V), 01 2.23
98/12, palli demolished
2021 Chittamur (M) 98/8
Page 118 of 140
CC.No. Theegal Suresh Babu Petitioner
1869 of S/o Krishnaiah 1, 3-P, filed contempt
2021 Sangam vari Street 9-A, Pittuvani case against
11 01 5.76
in W.P Kota Mandal 9-A3, 9- palli respondent
No. B. 9-C for
14232, demolition
TOTAL 46 65.566
V. Status of water quality:
APPCB collected the water samples from the waterbodies in the area including Mallam tank. The values indicate that there is an improvement in the water quality. Extract of the analysis results is submitted below:
Water sample collected from Royyala Vagu near Tagetamma temple 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH 7.0 6.9 8.1 8.0 7.1 7.4 7.5 EC 15120 23100 27700 5710 2990 880 801 TSS 36 12 12 10 10 24 24 TDS 9007 14322 17452 3655 1945 602 540 Water sample collected from Palamadugu vagu, Pittuvanipalli (V) 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH 7.1 6.8 8.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 EC 19800 21630 21190 6240 1175 1320 1205 TSS 20 10 10 12 12 20 38 TDS 11880 13194 13350 3994 760 790 816 Water sample collected from Mallam tank at GD - Nidigurthy road,Thunadilu 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH -- 7.2 8.3 7.9 7.4 7.2 7.6 EC -- 8470 9470 850 1258 764 740 TSS -- 18 16 8 10 16 29 TDS -- 5336 5967 536 792 450 496 Water sample collected from Mallam tank near Nagurkomma temple, Jalagarthipalem 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH -- 7.3 8.3 8.4 7.3 7.2 7.6 EC -- 8850 6920 981 119 523 554 TSS -- 16 14 10 10 28 16 TDS -- 5487 4498 618 716 310 334 Page 119 of 140 Water sample collected from Etigattu Kaluva, Pedavarthivari Kandriga (V) 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH 7.5 7.7 8.2 8.2 7.7 8.1 7.8 EC 15630 19980 11560 1742 1076 790 887 TSS 24 16 10 12 16 42 42 TDS 9378 12587 7398 1098 688 490 608 Water sample collected from Puli Kaluva, near Pittuvanipalli 27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 pH 7.5 7.4 8.3 8.3 7.4 7.1 7.7 EC 7150 8840 8170 1796 21840 810 886 TSS 22 18 16 16 12 40 48 TDS 4647 5569 5148 119 14196 520 602 Water sample collected from Puli Kaluva, Muttumbakam.
27.05.202 25.06.202 31.08.202 14.09.202 29.10.202 16.12.202 01.01.202
1 1 1 1 1 1 2
pH -- 7.0 8.2 8.3 7.9 7.1 7.8
EC -- 7970 7150 1428 1702 645 657
TSS -- 12 8 12 14 24 37
TDS -- 4861 4570 915 1459 398 448
Note: All values are expressed in mg/lt except pH.
It is submitted that the representative of APPCB is a member in the committee constituted by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal. The committee is submitting a detailed observations on aqua farming in the area and other findings.
Page 120 of 14049. The Joint Committee also filed another report dated Nil, e-filed on 21.08.2022 along with the report of Mr. Dr. KVSG Murali Krishna, Professor of Civil (Environmental) Engineering & Director Green Campus Initiatives, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinada.
50. The applicant also produced certain documents to prove the loss of income in support of their case. The applicant in O.A. No.122 of 2020 (SZ) has filed I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ) to take action against the committee members for not filing proper reports and also filing improper reports without showing the correct details under Section 26 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
51. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and respondents in all these cases.
52. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants in all these cases argued that in the report obtained under the RTI Act from the department shows that they have assessed the damage caused to the individual property owners on account of shrimp culture activity, but at the same time, they have not produced that report before this Tribunal. The additional documents produced by the applicant will go to show that there was loss of income in respect of each person and that was assessed for a period of 9 years and specifying the amount as well. They have assessed the compensation for each person, but when the report was filed, the same was not incorporated. But at the same time, they have mentioned that there was no agricultural loss occurred and that is incorrect and as such, they are liable for criminal prosecution for submitting false report before this Tribunal. Further, the documents produced will go to show that most of the units are running without obtaining any necessary permission and also the order passed by this Tribunal that apart from registration under the Coastal Aquaculture Act, 2005, if it is in the coastal zone covered by the CRZ Notification, they will have to obtain clearance from the CZMA as well and none of them have obtained the same. Further, the committee report will go to show that they have discharged the effluents into the water channel which reaches the main channel used for Page 121 of 140 irrigation purposes and the salinity of the water has been increased which is not fit for cultivation. So, they ought to have calculated the compensation in tune with the directions issued by this Tribunal and no environmental compensation was assessed, though it was found that they have committed violation and certain action was taken for demolition of the unauthorized units. Though it was mentioned that electricity connection was disconnected and the ponds were demolished, but even now, they are continuing their activity unauthorizedly.
53. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant had relied on the decision reported in Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum Vs. Union of India2 and also the decision of this Tribunal in Meenava Thanthai K.R. Selva Raj Kumar Meenavar Nala Sangam Vs. The Chairman, National Coastal Zone Management Authority, Govt. of India, MoEF&CC New Delhi and Ors.) and other connected matters 3 dated 05.07.2022 and Chandramani Kanhar Vs. State of Odisha4 in support of their case.
54. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State Departments, including the State Pollution Control Board argued that even prior to the application filed, a committee was formed under the leadership of the Sub Collector as directed by the District Collector and inspection was conducted on two days and unauthorized shrimp culture ponds were demolished and electricity supply was disconnected. Certain persons have moved the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the Hon'ble High Court has directed the authorities to consider their objection and pass appropriate orders. Considering the nature of activity, the committee is of the opinion that there is no environmental compensation need to be assessed. Further, separate garland drainage has been provided to drain out the water that has been used for shrimp culture and that is being allowed to drain out in the downstream area which ultimately reaches the sea and thereby, the possibility of discharging waste water from the shrimp culture ponds have been prevented and there is no possibility of any such water being drained into 2 (1996) 5 SCC 647 3 O.A. No.14 of 2017 and other connected matters 4 (2020) SCC Online Odisha 930 Page 122 of 140 the nearby agricultural lands. Further, the report of the committee will go to show that except the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ), others lands were not affected by salinity and even if there is any salinity, the production has not come down and since no chemicals were used in the shrimp culture activity, there is no possibility of severe pollution being caused in that area and others are also doing agriculture and it has not been affected and what was mentioned in the report relied on by the learned counsel for the applicant is only the nature of general reduction due to various reasons and not to this activity alone and as such, it cannot be said that they have committed any wilful misrepresentation or suppression of any material fact before this Tribunal. The State of Andhra Pradesh has passed an enactment viz., Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 so as to regulate these activities and they are monitoring the activities in the right perspective and actions are being taken in accordance with law.
55. The learned counsel appearing for the Coastal Aquaculture Authority argued that the aquaculture activities in the coastal zone are covered by the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and the Coastal Aquaculture Authority is the authority under the Act to regulate the shrimp culture activities in the coastal zone and they are monitoring and regulating the same. Whenever it was brought to their notice that there was any unauthorized shrimp culture farms are established, they are taking action and they are being demolished and electricity disconnection is being done.
56. The learned counsel appearing for the contesting party respondents viz., (Respondents Nos.7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 28, 31, 34, 39) argued that their units are covered by the license and they are strictly complying with the conditions and applications for renewal filed by them were pending and as per the provisions of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005, if permission is not granted within 15 days, then there is a deemed license and on that basis, they are running the unit and it cannot be said to be unauthorized. Though some of them have moved against the interim order passed by the Tribunal, the same was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court directing them to approach the Tribunal itself Page 123 of 140 for proper consideration. Some of them also moved the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against the demolition and electricity disconnection orders and some interim orders have been passed with a direction to the authorities to consider their objections and it is only a temporary measure and the right of the parties will have to be considered by this Tribunal.
57. We have considered the pleadings, reports submitted by the Joint Committee as well as by the official respondents and submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, written submissions submitted and also perused the documents available on record.
58. The common points that arose for consideration are:-
(i) Whether the party respondents are conducting the shrimp culture in an unauthorized and illegal manner in Ranganathapuram, Pittivaanapali, Padarthyvari Kandriga and Mallam Villages of SPSR Nellore District in State of Andhra Pradesh?
(ii) Whether there was any damage caused to the environment on account of the act committed by them?
(iii) Whether the applicants in all these cases are entitled for individual compensation as claimed by them for the alleged loss of income caused due to the alleged illegal discharge of waste water generated from the shrimp culture ponds?
(iv) What is the quantum of compensation to be assessed?
(v) What are all the further directions (if any) to be issued applying the „Precautionary Principle‟ to protect environment?
(vi) Whether any action has to be taken against the officials as claimed by the applicant in I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ) in O.A. No.122 of 2022 (SZ)?Page 124 of 140
POINTS:-
59. Grievance of the applicants in all these applications was that lot of unauthorized shrimp culture farms are emerging in the SPSR Nellore district and they are converting the agricultural lands for this purpose and discharging the waste water without proper treatment into the neighbouring agricultural lands, including the agricultural lands of the applicants causing damage to the soil making the agricultural activity impossible and they claimed individual compensation as mentioned in the earlier paragraphs. According to the applicants, these farms are being conducted without obtaining necessary permission and clearances as required under the law.
60. On the other hand, the official respondents have categorically contended that when complaints were received, a Task Force Committee was constituted as per the direction of the District Collector under the leadership of the Sub Collector and inspection was conducted and unauthorized shrimp farms were identified and they were demolished and electricity connections were disconnected. Further, the State of Andhra Pradesh has enacted the enactment by name Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and there are provisions provided for regularizing and regulating the activities.
61. It is settled law that in view of the dictum laid down in S. Jagannath Vs. Union of India & Ors.5 that commercial shrimp culture activities along the coastal zone has to be regulated and allowing such activities is likely to affect the marine ecology and it cannot be compared with the traditional shrimp culture that is being undertaken by the local fishermen, as that will not have any significant impact considering the quantity of waste that is likely to be generated. It is on that basis, the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and Rules there under were passed and it is being regulated as per the provisions. By virtue of Section 15 of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005, restrictions under the CRZ Notification as regards the shrimp culture are relaxed and 5 AIR 1997 SC 811 Page 125 of 140 a similar amendment was made in the CRZ Notification also by allowing the shrimp culture in a regulated manner in certain part of the coastal regulation zones as per the provision of the said Act. So, it is clear from this that they are expected to obtain necessary permission from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority by following the procedure provided therein and any activity done without obtaining permission under the said Act, will be deemed to be an unauthorized act.
62. Further, while considering the application of CRZ Notification and the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and its overriding effects on each other, the Special Bench of this Tribunal in A. Paramasivan Vs. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai & Ors. and other connected cases6 by Order dated 26.05.2022 has categorically observed that Section 15 of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 will not override the provisions of the CRZ Notification and if any activities will have to be carried out in the permitted area of the Coastal Regulation Zone, it can only be a permissible/regulated activity and apart from obtaining registration under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005, they will have to obtain clearance from the CZMA as well and if it is not obtained, then it will be deemed to be an unauthorized act.
63. Further, on the basis of the directions given by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, the CPCB had evolved a formulae in respect of assessment of environmental compensation for violation of the conditions and for running the unit against the environmental laws and even if no environmental damage has been caused on account of the activities and any activity was done with (or) without necessary permission or any violations have been committed, then the persons who are so violating are liable to pay environmental compensation as it is likely to cause environmental damage, even if specific environmental damage has been established.
64. With these principles in mind, the case in hand has to be considered.
6O.A. Nos.82 of 2016 (SZ), 173 of 2016 (SZ) & 175 of 2016 (SZ) Page 126 of 140
65. In order to ascertain the genuineness of the allegations made in the application, this Tribunal had appointed a Joint Committee and the Joint Committee has inspected the area and filed various reports received on 26.02.2021, 10.06.2021, 25.10.2021, 31.01.2022, 30.04.2022 and 22.08.2022. Apart from this, the official respondents Nos.2 to 5 also filed their individual response and independent reports were filed by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Agriculture Department, Electricity Department, Fisheries Department, Groundwater Department, Irrigation Department, Panchayat Raj and Revenue Department as well.
66. It is seen from the reports and also responses that the State of Andhra Pradesh had made zoning regulation of agricultural lands which are not fit for agricultural purpose where the aquaculture (shrimp/prawn culture) activity can be carried out so as to enhance the revenue of the people not able to do agricultural activity in their agricultural land for improving their economic condition. It is also seen from the various reports that even prior to filing of these applications by the applicants on the basis of the certain complaints received from the local people, including some of the applicants, the District Collector of the particular district had constituted a team including the members of various departments under the leadership of the Sub Collector and they have inspected the areas on 01.06.2020 and 05.06.2020 and certain actions have been taken against the unauthorized shrimp culture and certain unauthorized shrimp culture which were established in non-zone areas declared for conducting aquaculture activity and their electricity supply were disconnected. It is also seen from the various reports that even in the zoning areas where such activity is permissible, certain persons were conducting the activity without obtaining necessary permission and those ponds were demolished and electricity supply was disconnected.
67. The present applications were filed on 01.07.2020 and by that time, some actions have been taken by the authorities. The applicant had claimed compensation for four years at the rate of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) per Acre per year. The applicant had relied on the report said to have been obtained under the RTI Act prepared by the Sub Page 127 of 140 Collector's Office, Divisional Administrative Officer, SPSR Nellore District calculating the loss for a period from 2013 - 2022 at the rate of Rs.20,853/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Three only) per Acre per year.
68. It may be mentioned here that a perusal of the report will go to show that it was a general study conducted in respect of reduction in the agricultural produce based on which the amount has been calculated. But, it cannot be said to be a report by the competent authority to come to the conclusion that it was caused due to the activities of the shrimp culture on account of discharge of the waste water generated during operation by the shrimp culture farms. To arrive at a conclusion whether there is an impact on agriculture or not has to be done scientifically with the involvement of the Agriculture Department which is the technical department to conduct such studies.
69. Further, the report submitted by the Agriculture Department which was produced along with the latest Joint Committee report received on 22.08.2022 will go to show that from the soil analysis conducted except in one sample which is little excessive on electrical conductivity, other samples are suitable for cultivation of paddy crops. It was further reported that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past five years, there was no yield loss to the paddy fields in the subjected area. It was also seen from the report that during the visit of JNTUK Team on 11.08.2021, took samples from the aquaculture ponds, Mallam Tank, Pulikaluva and stagnated water from the Mallam Tank and it was noted that water flow in the channels and Mallam Tank is very less and the TDS value will decrease significantly when water body fills with adequate rainwater. They also given certain recommendations which reads as follows:-
"RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The remedial measures to be taken for the purpose of restoring the damage caused to the environment.
The results of the water samples indicate that almost all parameters are within the discharge standards stipulated by the MoEF&CC, Govt. of India. However, the aqua culture activity requires high saline water which is not suitable for paddy fields. Waste water from the aqua ponds contains salts and does not contain harmful chemicals such as heavy metals and phenols. It is required to stop the fresh discharge of saline water effluents into the fresh water bodies when higher saline values are found in Mallam tank inlet. Accumulated salts if any in the water bodies will get diluted during the rains/ floods.Page 128 of 140
Puli kaluva is the main feeding channel for Mallam tank. The flow in this channel will be high during rains/ floods. In the remaining period, flow will be very less and some of the aqua ponds discharge their effluents (Wastewaters) into the Puli kaluva. It is required to provide a regulator at a suitable location to divert water during non-rainy days to Palamaduguvagu so as to facilitate discharge of saline water into Sea.
2. Assessment of amount required for restoration. Once saline water entry into Mallam tank was stopped, the TDS in the Mallam tank becomes normal. Hence, there is no need for preparation of restoration plan separately.
3. Evolution of methodology to assess the environmental compensation on the un- authorized shrimp farmers.
The Fisheries department demolished 110.08 Ha of aqua ponds (175 nos) on 29.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 in presence of the revenue & other department officials. Aqua ponds in 41.63 Ha (66 nos) were not demolished due to court orders. There is meager activity going on in these unauthorized aqua ponds ever since their bunds were demolished i.e. since 30-07-2021.
However, the APPCB may submit to the Hon‟ble NGT not to impose Environmental Compensation on the aqua ponds as it is an activity very much similar to the agriculture and most of paddy farmers are showing interest to switch over to the aqua culture to sustain their livelihood.
4. Evolution of the methodology to assess the compensation to the farmers for whose lands were affected.
The Agriculture department collected 31 soil samples from paddy fields and analyzed the PH, Electrical conductivity, Nitrogen, Phosphorous, Potassium , Sulphur, Boron, Zinc, Ferrous, Manganese and Copper. From the analysis two samples were critical for germination which are having Electrical conductivity-3.7 dSm-1& 3.9dSm-1and One sample is injurious to crop which is having Electrical conductivity of 4.6dSm-1. The remaining samples are suitable for cultivation of paddy crop. High Electrical Conductivity of samples could not be attributed to the aqua culture activity in the area. There is a possibility that the soil may have high electrical conductivity due to close proximity of the saltwater creek in the area.
The Agriculture department recommended for application of farm yield manure and lime for the paddy fields which are having high electrical conductivity. They further reported that as per the crop cutting experiment results for the past 5 years there is no yield loss to the paddy fields in the subjected areas. Hence, there may not be any requirement of compensation distribution to the paddy farmers.
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
1. APPCB collected the water samples from the water bodies when there was less water, about 10% of its maximum holding capacity. APPCB/ Fisheries department shall collect samples from the water bodies in the area on monthly basis for a period of six months to ascertain the actual scenario on a holistic basis.
2. The aqua ponds are located in the Aqua Zone earmarked by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Hence, environmental compensation need not be imposed on the aqua ponds. However, they may be directed to obtain necessary approvals before starting the aqua culture activity in the area.
3. The Fisheries Department may provide Online TDS Meter at outlet of Mallam Tank which is leading to the paddy fields. This is required to ascertain the Salinity of water used for agriculture. In case of TDS values in outlet in excess of the permissible values, the Government authorities may take immediate remedial measures to regulate the entry of saline water streams into the Mallam Tank."
70. It is also seen from the report that if the saline level in the soil increases, it may have impact, otherwise there is no possibility of any impact on agricultural lands. They had also given the remedial measures to be taken as well.
71. The calculation made by the Sub Collector, Gudur, Nellore District on the basis of the general information collected will not be sufficient to come to the conclusion that there was loss of income occurred. Further, they have Page 129 of 140 calculated for a period of 9 years from 2013 to 2022 and as per the general law of limitation, one can claim compensation for a period of 3 years prior to the date of filing of the application and also subsequent compensation, after filing of the application and as per the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, the limitation period for claiming compensation was only 5 years. So, at the maximum, the applicant may be entitled to claim, if at all entitled for compensation for 5 years alone. Moreover, no basis was given as to how the loss of income was calculated except giving some formulae. This may depend upon the increase or decrease in the price as well. So, it cannot be said to be a proper scientific assessment and calculation of compensation for agricultural loss for the purpose of awarding compensation by the Tribunal, even to award compensation for agricultural loss that has been caused due to disasters, crop cutting experiments and joint study by Agriculture Department, Revenue and Statistical Departments is a requirement.
72. Further, the Joint Committee in all the reports came to the conclusion that there was no significant loss of income caused for agricultural activity in the neighbouring agricultural lands, including the land of the applicants which were situated very near to the aquaculture farms and most of the agricultural lands of the applicants are situated between 300-500 meters from the aquaculture farms and the impact of this has to be independently considered by the authorities by conducting proper evaluation. The documents produced by the applicant along with the written submission will only go to show that the applicants are having agricultural lands and they are paying revenue for the same. There is no dispute regarding the fact that these persons are having land in that area. It is further seen from the documents produced that a crime was registered as Crime No.104 of 2021 under Section 427 & 432 of IPC of Chittamuru Police Station on 17.10.2021 on the basis of the complaint given. That also shows that discharge of saline water from the aquaculture farms to the neighbouring agricultural lands, but that alone is not sufficient to come to the conclusion that it resulted in damage, as it is not known as to what happened to the crime registered after investigation. Even according to the applicant in the respective Page 130 of 140 applications, they were not doing agricultural activity since long time in their property. What was the condition of the land at that time and what was the reason for not doing agricultural activity by the applicants is also not clear, except making a general allegation that due to the aquaculture activity by the aquaculture farms established in the agricultural lands adjacent to their properties and their discharge of waste water prevented them from doing the same, which according to us is not sufficient to come to the conclusion that there is agricultural loss caused on account of the activities. But as regards the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 is concerned, there is an observation that the salinity level in his agricultural property is light and not suitable for paddy cultivation. So, the entitlement of compensation for agricultural loss alone has to be probed for maximum period of 5 years prior to the filing of the application provided he was engaged in paddy cultivation earlier by the committee in force to assess agricultural loss during disaster.
73. It is seen from the report submitted by the Fisheries Department and other departments that earlier aquaculture farms were discharging the liquid waste and solid waste into the water bodies of Royyala Vagu, Ettigattu Kaluva, Pala Madugu and Mallam PWD Tank and those inlets were closed and draining channel was provided which ultimately reaches the downstream and then joins the river. That shows that they were likely to discharge the liquid waste which ultimately reached the water body and polluted the water body by increasing salinity of the water and using of which may affect the quality of water in that area. But no compensation was assessed against those persons for discharging the same into the water body without proper treatment knowing that the waste water may have more saline in nature and discharging the same into the water body will increase the salinity of the water in the water bodies. So under such circumstances, these aspects will have to be considered by the State Pollution Control Board while assessing the environmental compensation against those persons who are responsible for such discharging till it was diverted through the draining channel provided. While assessing the compensation in respect of the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ), the committee in existence in that district to Page 131 of 140 assess the agricultural loss during disaster is directed to ascertain as to whether the water from those irrigation tanks have been utilized for irrigation at that time and what would have been the impact on the fertility of the land and production capacity.
74. As regards the environmental compensation to be fixed against those persons who are responsible for conducting such activity without obtaining necessary permission is concerned, the observation made by the Joint Committee that since there is no possibility of any serious impact, no necessity to impose any environmental compensation cannot be accepted in view of the directions issued by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in several matters of this nature that compensation will have to be calculated on the basis of the formulae evolved by the CPCB as directed by the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.7
75. So, the State Pollution Control Board has to make a calculation of environmental compensation on the basis of the formulae evolved by the CPCB in this regard and take steps to recover the amount from the persons who are responsible for the same in accordance with law.
76. Some of the contesting party respondents (viz., Respondents Nos.7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 28, 31, 34, 39) who filed counter, have stated that they obtained necessary registration under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and thereafter, they filed an application for renewal and due to the pandemic situation, the same were not granted. By virtue of Section 22 of the said Act, if applications were not either rejected or granted within 15 days, then it will be deemed to have been granted and as such, they are conducting the aquaculture activity on the basis of the deemed license and it cannot be said to be illegal. Further, under the provision of the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020, all existing units can apply for license within four months and applications have been filled and it is pending.
7 O.A. No.593 of 2017 (PB) Page 132 of 14077. It may be mentioned here that the Special Bench of this Tribunal in A. Paramasivan Vs. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai & Ors. and other connected cases8 by Order dated 26.05.2022 while considering these aspects categorically held that persons who are doing aquaculture activity within the CRZ zone, though permissible, they will have to obtain clearances both under the CRZ Notification and the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and obtaining registration under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 alone will not be sufficient for this purpose. So, it will be deemed to be a violation even by such persons as well in view of the declaration made by this Tribunal on this aspect. Though the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 provides for certain permission for the existing units, if it is in contravention of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 which is the central legislation, then the State legislation to that extent will be repugnant will not be valid in view of the several decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard.
78. Further, it is not known as to whether any litigations are pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in this regard or whether those applications have been disposed of by giving directions to the authorities to consider the objections of the aggrieved parties and pass appropriate orders. If those litigations are pending, then the order (if any) passed by the Tribunal in respect of those persons who have filed the writ petition will be subject to the final disposal of that writ petition.
79. Under such circumstances, we feel that there is no necessity to take any action against the authorities under Section 26 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, as claimed by the applicant in I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ) in O.A. No.122 of 2020 (SZ) and accordingly, the interlocutory application [I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ)] is dismissed.
80. In view of the detailed discussions and observations made above, we feel that all these Original Applications can be disposed of by giving following directions:-
8O.A. Nos.82 of 2016 (SZ), 173 of 2016 (SZ) & 175 of 2016 (SZ) Page 133 of 140
(i) The aquaculture (shrimp culture/prawn culture) farms which are operating in the CRZ area as defined under the CRZ Notification, 2011 and 2019 will have to obtain CRZ Clearance from the CZMA apart from obtaining registration either under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 or Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and if both these permissions are not obtained, then it will be deemed to be an unauthorized act and they will be liable to pay environmental compensation for the violation of environmental laws on the basis of the formulae evolved by the CPCB as directed by the Principal Bench in the similar matters applying the 'Polluter Pays‟ principle as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.9 and M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamal Nath & Ors.10
(ii) The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is directed to identify such unauthorized aquaculture farms those have been established in the non-authorized zone or encroaching into the Government land without obtaining permission which were already demolished and also from persons who are conducting the same in the zoning area without obtaining permission whose ponds were demolished and also from persons who have not obtained both the permissions for conducting aquaculture farm in the CRZ area covered by the CRZ Notification and the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act as directed by the Special Bench in A. Paramasivan Vs. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai & Ors. and other connected cases11 by Order dated 26.05.2022 and calculate the compensation amount after giving opportunity to the parties by issuing show cause notice and also giving opportunity of being heard strictly complying with the principles of natural justice and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
9 (1996) 5 SCC 647 10 (2002) 3 SCC 653 = AIR 2002 SC 1515 11 O.A. Nos.82 of 2016 (SZ), 173 of 2016 (SZ) & 175 of 2016 (SZ) Page 134 of 140
(iii) While assessing the compensation for loss of agricultural income in respect of the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ), the committee in existence in that district to assess the agricultural loss during disaster is directed to ascertain as to whether the water from those irrigation tanks have been utilized for irrigation at that time and what would have been the impact on the fertility of the land and production capacity.
(iv) The District Collector - Thirupathi District (erstwhile SPSR Nellore District) is directed to monitor the establishment of aquaculture farms as per the zoning regulations and also on the basis of the provisions of the regulated mechanism provided, including the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and CRZ Notification and if any violations were found, then they are directed to take appropriate action against those persons including removal of the same, apart from assessing the compensation to be recovered from them for such violation as directed by this Tribunal in Direction No.(II).
(v) The committee in existence in the district to assess agricultural loss during disaster is directed to inspect the agricultural land belonging to the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ) and ascertain the soil as well as the water quality in his land and whether any deterioration in the soil quality or water quality has been caused on account of any discharge of waste water from the aquaculture farms situated near to his property and if it is found that the soil / water quality has been affected which resulted in agricultural loss (if any) depending on the nature of cultivation said to have been undertaken by him earlier and if loss has been found on account of such evaluation, then assess the compensation and pay the compensation amount to him from the environmental compensation collected by the State Pollution Control Board as directed by this Tribunal in Direction No.(II), after giving an opportunity of being heard to the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ) in accordance with law.
Page 135 of 140(vi) The District Collector - Thirupathi District (erstwhile SPSR Nellore District) in coordination with the Irrigation Department and CPCB are directed to implement the recommendations made by Dr. KVSG Murlai Krishna, Professor of Civil (Environmental) Engineering and Director Green Campus Initiatives, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinada and also the Joint Committee in various reports in its letter and spirit so as to mitigate the possible pollution that is likely to be caused and also to help the agricultural activity in the neighbouring agricultural lands without causing any disturbance to them on account of operation of the aquaculture farms.
(vii) The State Pollution Control Board in consultation with the CPCB is also directed to explore the possibility of bringing the aquaculture farms under the consent mechanism as has been done in respect of poultry farms, considering the extent of the property, quantity of waste that is likely to be discharged and the possible pollution that is likely to be caused and the CPCB is also directed to consider these aspects and issue necessary guidelines or directions of regulating such activities, as that is likely to come under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and issue necessary notification as required under Section 3 r/w. Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Rules there under.
(viii) The orders passed by the Tribunal will be subject to the orders to be passed in the writ petition (if any) pending consideration before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in this regard in respect of persons who filed such writ petition.
(ix) In view of the findings arrived at by this Tribunal that there was no wilful suppression or misrepresentation and the documents relied on by the applicant alone is not sufficient to come to the conclusion that they are entitled to get compensation on that basis and the officials are liable to be prosecuted as claimed in the application and the interlocutory application [I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ) in O.A. No.122 of 2020 (SZ)] is dismissed.
Page 136 of 14081. The points are answered accordingly.
82. In the result, all these Original Applications are allowed in part and disposed of with the following directions:-
(I) The aquaculture (shrimp culture/prawn culture) farms which are operating in the CRZ area as defined under the CRZ Notification, 2011 and 2019 will have to obtain CRZ Clearance from the CZMA apart from obtaining registration either under the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 or Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and if both these permissions are not obtained, then it will be deemed to be an unauthorized act and they will be liable to pay environmental compensation for the violation of environmental laws on the basis of the formulae evolved by the CPCB as directed by the Principal Bench in the similar matters applying the 'Polluter Pays‟ principle as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.12 and M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamal Nath & Ors.13 (II) The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is directed to identify such unauthorized aquaculture farms those have been established in the non-authorized zone or encroaching into the Government land without obtaining permission which were already demolished and also from persons who are conducting the same in the zoning area without obtaining permission whose ponds were demolished and also from persons who have not obtained both the permissions for conducting aquaculture farm in the CRZ area covered by the CRZ Notification and the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act as directed by the Special Bench in A. Paramasivan Vs. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai & Ors. and other connected cases 14 by 12 (1996) 5 SCC 647 13 (2002) 3 SCC 653 = AIR 2002 SC 1515 14 O.A. Nos.82 of 2016 (SZ), 173 of 2016 (SZ) & 175 of 2016 (SZ) Page 137 of 140 Order dated 26.05.2022 and calculate the compensation amount after giving opportunity to the parties by issuing show cause notice and also giving opportunity of being heard strictly complying with the principles of natural justice and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
(III) While assessing the compensation for loss of agricultural income in respect of the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ), the committee in existence in that district to assess the agricultural loss during disaster is directed to ascertain as to whether the water from those irrigation tanks have been utilized for irrigation at that time and what would have been the impact on the fertility of the land and production capacity.
(IV) The District Collector - Thirupathi District (erstwhile SPSR Nellore District) is directed to monitor the establishment of aquaculture farms as per the zoning regulations and also on the basis of the provisions of the regulated mechanism provided, including the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and CRZ Notification and if any violations were found, then they are directed to take appropriate action against those persons including removal of the same, apart from assessing the compensation to be recovered from them for such violation as directed by this Tribunal in Direction No.(II).
(V) The committee in existence in the district to assess agricultural loss during disaster is directed to inspect the agricultural land belonging to the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ) and ascertain the soil as well as the water quality in his land and whether any deterioration in the soil quality or water quality has been caused on account of any discharge of waste water from the aquaculture farms situated near to his property and if it is found that the soil / water quality has been affected which resulted in agricultural loss (if any) depending on the nature of Page 138 of 140 cultivation said to have been undertaken by him earlier and if loss has been found on account of such evaluation, then assess the compensation and pay the compensation amount to him from the environmental compensation collected by the State Pollution Control Board as directed by this Tribunal in Direction No.(II), after giving an opportunity of being heard to the applicant in O.A. No.114 of 2020 (SZ) in accordance with law.
(VI) The District Collector - Thirupathi District (erstwhile SPSR Nellore District) in coordination with the Irrigation Department and CPCB are directed to implement the recommendations made by Dr. KVSG Murlai Krishna, Professor of Civil (Environmental) Engineering and Director Green Campus Initiatives, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinada and also the Joint Committee in various reports in its letter and spirit so as to mitigate the possible pollution that is likely to be caused and also to help the agricultural activity in the neighbouring agricultural lands without causing any disturbance to them on account of operation of the aquaculture farms.
(VII) The State Pollution Control Board in consultation with the CPCB is also directed to explore the possibility of bringing the aquaculture farms under the consent mechanism as has been done in respect of poultry farms, considering the extent of the property, quantity of waste that is likely to be discharged and the possible pollution that is likely to be caused and the CPCB is also directed to consider these aspects and issue necessary guidelines or directions of regulating such activities, as that is likely to come under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and issue necessary notification as required under Section 3 r/w. Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Rules there under.
Page 139 of 140(VIII) The orders passed by the Tribunal will be subject to the orders to be passed in the writ petition (if any) pending consideration before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in this regard in respect of persons who filed such writ petition.
(IX) In view of the findings arrived at by this Tribunal that there was no wilful suppression or misrepresentation and the documents relied on by the applicant alone is not sufficient to come to the conclusion that they are entitled to get compensation on that basis and the officials are liable to be prosecuted as claimed in the application and the interlocutory application [I.A. No.145 of 2022 (SZ) in O.A. No.122 of 2020 (SZ)] is dismissed.
(X) Considering the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their respective costs in the respective Original Applications.
(XI) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the District Collector - SPSR Nellore District, Director of Fisheries Department, Coastal Aquaculture Authority, Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority, State Pollution Control Board, Irrigation Department, Fisheries Department, Regional Office, CPCB, Bangalore and CPCB - New Delhi and also to the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Environment, Forest, Science & Technology, State of Andhra Pradesh for their information and compliance of directions.
83. With the above observations and directions, all these Original Applications are disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M. O.A. No.114/2020 (SZ) to O.A. No.122/2020 (SZ) & I.A. No.145/2022 (SZ) 15th September 2022. Mn.
Page 140 of 140