Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kalidindi Balarama Raju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 18 November, 2022
Author: M. Ganga Rao
Bench: M. Ganga Rao
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
Writ Petition No.103 of 2021
ORDER:
The petitioners who are agriculturists filed this writ petition to declare the impugned proceedings dated 9.12.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent - Joint Director and Member Convener wherein and whereby cancelled the fresh water aquaculture licenses of the petitioners in respect of the subject aquaculture farms as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they owned Ac.2.30 cents, Ac.5.20 cents, Ac.5.17 cents, Ac.4.33 cents and Ac.3.42 cents of land covered by Survey Nos.224-2, 3&5, 105- 2, 88/1, 88/2A-1, 88/2A-2, 88/2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2F, 26/AA-2. 26-2, 26/1A-1, 26/1B of Lankalakoderu Revenue Village, Palakollu Mandal, West Godavari District and they obtained licenses in the year 2016. The 3rd respondent issued notice dated 1.6.2020 alleging that the 7th respondent made a complaint against the petitioners and other farmers before Lokayukta, Andhra Pradesh vide Complaint No.559/2018/B1 and the petitioners were asked to submit their explanation 2 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The petitioners submitted their explanation/ objections on 12.6.2020 to the 3rd respondent requesting the respondents 2 to 6 to consider the real facts and drop the alleged notice dated 01.06.2020. On 24.12.2020, the 3rd respondent's Subordinate staff visited the subject aquaculture farms and insisted the petitioners to close the respective tanks showing the proceedings dated 09.12.2020 of the 3rd respondent, issued as per the decision of the 120th meeting of District Level Committee dated 09.12.2020 directing the petitioners to vacate from their aquaculture tanks alleging that they are resorting to prawn culture in violation of the rules. The impugned proceedings are passed without considering their representations/ objections. Being aggrieved by the impugned proceedings, the present writ petition came to be filed.
3. The 6th respondent Fisheries Development Officer, Palakollu Mandal, West Godavari District filed counter on his behalf and also on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 stating that one Sri Nalli Rajesh made a complaint before the Lok Ayukta, Andhra Pradesh stating that the petitioners are doing unauthorized shrimp culture and requested to take 3 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 action against them. The Collector and District Magistrate, West Godavari instructed to conduct joint inspection and submit a detailed report on the petitioners' fish tanks. The Mandal Level Committee submitted joint inspection reports on 07.04.2020 stating that the petitioners are doing shrimp culture contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.3.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.5.2015 and they are releasing polluted water into Rapaka Irrigation Channel. The District Collector/Chairman for Fresh Water Aquaculture on 30.4.2020 had instructed the authorities to issue notice to the petitioners duly calling their explanation. The Joint Director of Fisheries, Eluru issued notice on 01.6.2020 calling for their explanations. The petitioners submitted their explanation on 12.6.2020 stating that the Mandal Level Committee has not done their inspection properly. Thereon, the Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavar, Eluru issued Memo dated 07.10.2020 to the Mandal Level Committee/Convener, Palakollu to conduct re-inspection and submit report. The Mandal Level Committee, Palakollu has conducted joint inspection on 19.10.2020 in the presence of the petitioners and reported that the petitioners are doing shrimp culture and releasing saline water into Irrigation 4 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 Bodhi, which leads to Rapaka Irrigation Channel without valid permissions from the competent authorities and violated the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.3.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.5.2015. The matter is placed before the 120th District Level Committee meeting on 09.12.2020 for taking necessary action. The District Level Committee chaired by the District Collector has resolved to cancel the licenses and permitted the Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari to cancel the licenses as the petitioners have violated clause E(1) of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.3.2013. As per the recommendations of 120th District Level Committee, the Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari issued the impugned proceedings dated 09.12.2020 by cancelling the licenses of the petitioners.
4. Sri Seetharam Chaparla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners while reiterating the averments of the writ affidavit and reply affidavit would contend that the impugned cancellation orders are passed in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.3.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.5.2015. The petitioners' explanations dated 12.06.2020 denying the allegation of rearing prawn culture 5 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 and releasing water into Rapaka Irrigation Channel is not considered and the impugned cancellation order passed by the 3rd respondent is without there being any legal evidence. When the neighboring upper stream aquaculturists are allowed to rear prawn culture in their fish tanks by using saline water drawn from the bore wells and releasing the polluted saline water into the drainage channel and due to seepage, the polluted water is entering into the petitioners' aquaculture farms spoiling fresh water aquaculture farms of the petitioners. The petitioners are doing their aquaculture in strict adherence to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and 15 and as per law. They never violated terms and conditions stipulated in the permissions and it is only based on the Mandal Level Committee report and political rivalry only the permissions were cancelled.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi1, for the proposition that when the impugned order suffers from reasons, the respondent authorities by way of supplement in the shape of evidence cannot improve their 1 (1978) 1 SCC 405 6 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 case. The said case is with reference to the election issue. But in the present case, the petitioners are resorting for illegal L.Vannamei shrimp culture contrary to the permissions of fresh water aqua culture in the fish tanks. The said contentions is unsustainable in view of the reasons given in the impugned order and also the order is supported by reports of Mandal Level Committees, which reports are submitted based on the inspections conducted by the Mandal Level Comities' in the presence of the petitioners and they are given ample opportunity and the District Level Committees considered all the aspects.
6. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader for Fisheries while reiterating the averments of the counter would contend that the petitioners are resorting to illegal rearing of shrimp culture in their aquaculture tanks contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and 15. The Mandal Level Committee conducted joint inspection along with the petitioners on 07.04.2020 and found that the petitioners are doing shrimp culture and releasing saline water into Rapaka Irrigation Channel and the 3rd respondent issued noticed dated 01.06.2020 calling for their explanations and the petitioners submitted their explanation on 12.06.2020 stating 7 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 that the Mandal Level Committee has not done their inspection properly and thereafter as per the instructions of the Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari, Eluru dated 07.10.2020, the Mandal Level Committee/Convener, Palakollu had conducted re-inspection on 19.10.2020 in the presence of the petitioners and submitted a report that the petitioners are doing shrimp culture and releasing saline water into Irrigation Bodhi, which leads to Rapaka Irrigation Channel contrary to the permissions. The District Level Committee chaired by the District Collector after considering the inspection report of Mandal Level Committee and explanation submitted by the petitioners in its 120th District Level Committee meeting resolved to cancel the licenses of the petitioners and accordingly, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned cancellation orders and there is no illegality or irregularity.
7. The learned Government Pleader would further submit that this Court appointed Smt K.S.G.Padmavathi, Advocate, as Advocate Commissioner to inspect the subject tanks and submit a report. Accordingly, after issuing notices to all the parties, the Advocate Commissioner inspected the tanks on 26.02.2022 in the presence of the petitioners and their 8 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 representatives and official respondent Nos.3, 4 and 6 and Revenue Inspector of Palakollu attended on behalf of the 5th respondent and Fisheries Development Officer of Bhimavaram who is the Lab Incharge by name Lavanya along with unofficial respondent No.7 and enquired and photographed the tanks and drawn water samples. The Fisheries Development Officer Lavanya tested the water drawn from the tanks with the help of Refractro Meter for salinity of water. On testing, it showed as 5 PPT (PPT means a Part per thousand or percentage 1 PPT means 1 MG of solute in 1000 MG of solution) and the water is being released through the out-let located on the south side through panta Bodhi to Rapaka channel. The Advocate Commissioner also collected some fish in the tank by using the net and found that the petitioners are resorting to L. Vannamei shrimp culture contrary to the permissions granted to them. The petitioners are entitled to grow only fresh water fish culture in the tanks. The petitioners have not filed any objections to the said Advocate Commissioner report. He would further submit that the writ petition is not maintainable against the impugned cancellation order as statutory appeal is provided under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development 9 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 Authority Act and the rules made thereunder. Without availing the alternative remedy of appeal, the petitioner approached this court and the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court as the disputed question of facts which arise for consideration cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances, submission of the counsel and perused the record, this Court found that the District Level Committee on a reference of the complaint by the Lokayukta, got enquired into the matter and submitted a report on 07.04.2020 stating that the petitioners are doing shrimp culture. On receipt of notice dated 01.06.2020, the petitioners submitted their explanation on 12.06.2020 stating that the Mandal Level Committee has not done their inspection properly. Thereafter, as per the instructions of the Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari, Eluru dated 07.10.2020, the Mandal Level Committee/Convener, Palakollu has conducted re-inspection on 19.10.2020 in the presence of the petitioners and submitted a report to the effect that the petitioners are doing L. Vannamei shrimp culture, which culture is prohibited in the fresh water tanks and releasing saline water into 10 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 Irrigation Bodhi, which leads to Rapaka Irrigation Channel contrary to the permissions. The District Level Committee chaired by the District Collector after considering the inspection report of Mandal Level Committee and explanation submitted by the petitioners in its 120th District Level Committee meeting resolved to cancel the licenses of the petitioners and accordingly, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned cancellation orders and there is no illegality or irregularity. Fresh Water aquaculture permissions are granted only in the lands coming under the aquaculture zones where the lands are inundated, submerged, not fit for paddy or for other agricultural operations. However, the aquaculturists are resorting for digging of bore wells under the guise of replenishing the evaporated water in the fish tanks in spite of plenty of water available and are drawing saline water from the bore wells and resorting to shrimp culture. When the water in the tanks is checked with the Refracto Meter, it is shown as 5 PPT. Shrimp culture is grown only in 5 PPT saline water and also Aerators are erected. As seen from the photographs submitted by the Advocate Commissioner, in the Fish tanks Aerators machines are erected and there is nothing on record to show that the bore 11 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 wells are dug with the permission from the Tahsildar under the provisions of WALTA Act. Hence, the contention of the petitioners that there is no evidence and no opportunity is given to the petitioners to reach a conclusion that the petitioners are resorting to L.Vannamei shrimp culture unauthorizedly, could not be countenanced. This Court found that the District Level Committee based on the ample evidence placed before it in the shape of reports submitted by the Mandal Level Committees came to the conclusion that the petitioners are resorting to illegal prawn culture. The petitioners are granted licenses only for freshwater aqua culture. By resorting to shrimp culture, they are releasing saline polluted water into the Rapaka Irrigation Channel, which goes to the paddy fields. Certainly it will cause damage to the crops and also affect the drinking water source of the villagers. Hence, this Court found that there is no illegality or irregularity in canceling the petitioners' fresh water aqua culture license. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. The interim order dated 05.01.2021 is vacated. The respondent authorities are given liberty to take appropriate action as per 12 MGR, J W.P.No.103 of 2021 the provisions of law, including penal action, if the petitioners are resorting to shrimp culture without any permissions. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_____________________
M. GANGA RAO, J
Date: .11.2022
CSR
13 MGR, J
W.P.No.103 of 2021
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
W.P.No.103 OF 2021
DT: .11.2022
CSR