Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Mataparthi Dhanaraju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 July, 2021
Author: Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
Bench: Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
WRIT PETITION No.2770 OF 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents 2 to 6 in seizing the bore wells of the petitioners on 13.01.2020 situated in respective aquaculture fields without following the procedure and without issuing any notice, as arbitrary and illegal and a consequential direction was sought to restore the bore wells.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they made applications pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.7, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (Fish.II) Department, dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.24, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (Fish) Department, dated 12.09.2019 seeking permission for continuation of existing aquaculture ponds; when the said applications are pending, without any notice, the respondents 2 to 6 visited the subject fields on 13.01.2020 and seized the bore wells contrary to clause 7.15 in G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 16.03.2013; petitioners are drawing water from the bore wells for supplementing the losses from evaporation, seepage etc., and they are not drawing water from the bore wells to fresh water aquaculture farm; the 1st petitioner applied for regularization of farm on 28-06-2019; the 2nd and 3rd petitioners applied for renewal as existing farm; the 4th petitioner applied for regularization as existing fresh water aquaculture farm on 30.06.2019; the 5th petitioner leased out the land to one K.V.V.N. Satyanarayana and he applied on 27.06.2019 2 and the 6th petitioner obtained provisional permission on 02.06.2014; as per clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7, the authorities are permitting to use the bore water for supplementing the losses. Challenging the said seizure of the bore wells, the present writ petition is filed.
3. When the writ petition came up for admission, on 23.03.2020 restoration of the bore wells which are situated in the petitioners' fields was directed with a further direction that they shall be used only once in a week for a period of four hours for refreshing and office of the Fisheries Department was directed to be present to monitor the usage of the water during the said period of four hours and to ensure that the bore wells are not used after that.
4. Counter-affidavit along with vacate stay petition was filed by the 4th respondent on 04-07-2020 and in the said counter-affidavit, it is stated inter alia that a complaint was received from one Pamu Surya Rao and other farmers on 13.06.2019 against the un- authorized saline water aquaculture activities at Kithanacheruvu village, Uppalaguptam Mandal, East Godavari District and they also filed W.P.No.9426 of 2019 seeking a direction to the official respondents to take steps to close the saline aqua ponds in Kithanacheruvu village. The said writ petition was disposed of directing the District Collector / Chairman for District Level Committee for fresh water aquaculture to consider the representation dated 13.06.2019 of the petitioners therein and to pass appropriate orders. In compliance of the said order, notice dated 14.10.2019 was issued to all the concerned and their 3 statements were also recorded on 22-10-2019 and the Joint Collector-II along with the members of the District Level and Mandal Level Committees have visited the subject area on 13.11.2019 and examined the ground reality and it was observed that the petitioners and some other farmers involved themselves in unauthorized culture of L.vennamei prawn by using saline water from bore wells which were dug unauthorizedly and that the District Level Committee met on 06.01.2020 and the applications of the 30 defaulting aqua farms were rejected for violation of the guidelines and the Superintendent Engineer, A.P.E.P.D.C.L. was directed to disconnect the power supply of the unauthorized bore wells and the Mandal Task Force Committee was directed to close the unauthorized bore wells. Accordingly, nine (09) power connections were disconnected and twenty (20) bore wells were closed.
5. Aggrieved by the said action, the present writ petition is filed.
6. Reply affidavit is filed by the petitioners stating inter alia that as the petitioners have filed applications, it cannot be said that they are cultivating unauthorized aquaculture and it is denied that the petitioners are cultivating unauthorized aquaculture of L.vennamei prawns by storing the water in their unauthorized lands.
7. When the matter came up on 18-06-2021, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the applications filed by the petitioners seeking regularization in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.24, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (Fish) Department, dated 12.09.2019 were already rejected and communicated to the petitioners herein and hence learned 4 Government Pleader was directed to file copies of the said rejection order and also directed to produce the record or file an affidavit, but no affidavit is filed by the learned Government Pleader till now. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted on 18.06.2021 that if the rejection orders are served on them, the petitioners would challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.
8. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader through a memo filed proceedings of the Fisheries Development Officer dated 12.07.2021 which shows that the applications filed by the petitioners were rejected on 29.01.2020 and 30.01.2020 by the District Level Committee, but in the counter- affidavit filed by the 4th respondent at paragraph 5, it is stated that the District Level Committee rejected the applications of 30 defaulting aqua farms on 06.01.2020. But the proceedings of the Fisheries Development Officer dated 12.07.2021 shows 12 names.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.Bokka Satyanarayana submits that the proceedings of the District Level Committee are not served on him as on date and that the Fisheries Development Officer is not competent to reject the regularization applications made by the petitioners.
10. This Court is not inclined to go into those aspects in this writ petition, as the said proceedings are not the subject matter of this writ petition. As the applications of the petitioners are rejected, no relief can be granted in the present writ petition directing the respondents to restore the bore wells. However, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the said proceedings dated 12.07.2021 5 rejecting the regularization applications of the petitioners, if they are so advised. As there is an interim direction granted on 23.03.2020 directing the respondents 2 to 5 to permit the petitioners for partial restoration of the bore wells to use only once in a week for a period of four hours for refreshing the pond, the respondents are directed not to demolish the ponds for a period of four (04) weeks, i.e. till 23-08-2021, as the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the prawns are there in the subject tanks.
11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
_______________________________________ JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI Date: 24-07-2021 Note: Issue CC in three days (B/o) ARR 6 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI WRIT PETITION No.2770 OF 2020 DATED : 24-07-2021 ARR