Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Intoori Chandra Mohan Rao, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 1 October, 2020
Author: M. Ganga Rao
Bench: M. Ganga Rao
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
Writ Petition No.9009 of 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing orders in RC.No.536/A2/2014-7, dated 28.01.2020 against the petitioners' aquaculture farms directing them to evict the aquaculture farms within a period of seven (7) days from the date of receipt of the orders as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 26.05.2015 of Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently, to set aside the order in Rc.No.536/A2/2014-7, dated 28.01.2020 issued by the 4th respondent.
The case of the petitioners is that they are agriculturists having lands situated at Moyyeru village, Ganapavaram Mandal, West Godavari District. As cultivating of paddy become not viable and with an intention to cultivate the aquaculture farm, they obtained provisional registration certificate as required under G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.05.2015 to dig fresh water fish tanks in the lands of the 1st petitioner situated in Survey Nos.2/2, 2/3, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3, 3/4A, 3/4B, 3/5, 3/5A1, 3/5A2, 3/6A, 3/6B, 4/1, 4/3A1B, 4/3B, 4/5, 11/1 and in the lands of the 2nd petitioner situated in Survey Nos.4/4, 10/1, 11/1 respectively for rearing fresh water fish in the fish tanks. When the petitioners had started digging fish tanks, the 7th respondent filed W.P.No.23259 of 2017 being aggrieved by the grant of provisional registration certificate to the 2 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 petitioners making them as respondents 19 and 20. This court disposed of the said writ petition on 17.07.2017 directing the respondents to give notice to the unofficial respondents and pass appropriate orders after hearing them. Accordingly, the 4th respondent passed orders on 23.08.2017 stating that the digging of fish tanks by the petitioners is in contravention of the guidelines issued by G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15 and the provisional registration granted to them was cancelled and directed the petitioners to stop digging of fish tanks. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed W.P.No.35924 of 2017 and batch stating that the 4th respondent, without issuing any notice and without giving an opportunity of hearing to them, straight away passed the orders on 23.08.2017, which is illegal. This court on 11.12.2017 disposed of the said writ petition along with batch of writ petitions setting aside the impugned order dated 23.08.2017 therein and the 3rd respondent therein, the Deputy Director of Fisheries, West Godavari District, Eluru had given liberty to take decision afresh in the matter and pass appropriate orders in strict adherence to the procedure established by law, however, after affording opportunity to the petitioners and following the directions of this court in the order dated 17.07.2017 passed in W.P.No.23259 of 2017, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. In view of the directions in the operative portion of the said order, the petitioners shall not sow any seeds in any of the fish/ prawn tanks and cultivate, and the respondents 2 to 5 shall ensure 3 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 that the petitioners shall comply with the said direction. Pursuant to the said orders of this court, the Chairman, District Level Committee passed orders in Notice No.536/A2/2014, dated 01.01.2018 stating that on perusal of the inspection report shows that there are bore wells in the proposed aqua ponds and power lines being erected which indicates the malafide prawn culture activity of the petitioners that they are doing shrimp culture in the ponds, who are provisionally permitted to dig fresh water fish tanks and if the ground saline water is taped for aquaculture, there will be a problem of salinization which affect the adjacent fertile agriculture lands and directing the authorities not to allow shrimp culture in the said ponds and directed to follow the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.5, dated 26.05.2015.
It appears, when the petitioners, in contravention of the order dated 01.01.2018 passed by the Chairman, District Level Committee, continued to carry on shrimp culture in the fish tanks, the 7th respondent filed W.P.No.4697 of 2018 to take action against the petitioners to stop aquaculture farms. Pending writ petition, the 4th respondent issued Notice dated 12.03.2018 to the petitioners, stating that as per the field inspection, it is found that the petitioners are cultivating prawn culture in violation of Government rules and after discussing in the 92nd District Level Committee meeting resolved to evict the aquaculture farms within 7 days of receipt of the notice. Questioning the said notice dated 12.03.2018, the petitioners filed W.P.No.10321 of 2018 before this court and this court passed 4 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 orders on 28.03.2018 suspending the notice stating that the impugned order dated 12.03.2018 refers to a speaking order dated 01.01.2018, which records that personal hearing was given to the petitioners, there is no reference to any explanation offered by the petitioner in the said speaking order for any application of mind to the said explanation offered by the petitioner. Therefore, there shall be interim suspension as prayed for, against which the 7th respondent preferred writ appeal in W.A.No.261 of 2018 wherein the petitioners were shown as respondents 1 and 3. After hearing at length, the petitioners/respondents in the writ appeal sought permission to withdraw W.P.No.10298 of 2018 and 10321 of 2018 with a liberty to file fresh writ petitions incorporating certain additional facts in support of the writ petition. While granting permission to withdraw the writ petitions, the writ appeals were also disposed of accordingly by the order dated 24.08.2018. The authorities issued notice on 04.04.2018 to petitioners stating that the petitioners have been cultivating prawn culture by using bore water contrary to the Government rules and regulations and directed the petitioners to evict from prawn culture within 7 days, as they have not given their explanation to the earlier notice, otherwise action would be taken as per the Government rules and regulations. The petitioners again filed W.P.No.16358 of 2018 along with 4 others questioning the notices dated 04.04.2018 stating that the respondents are harassing the petitioners by passing the orders repeatedly. This court disposed of the writ petition on 31.10.2019 directing the petitioners to submit 5 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 their explanation to the notice dated 04.04.2018 treating the said notice as show cause notice within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The respondents are directed to give opportunity to the 7th respondent to file his objections and consider the same strictly in accordance with law. Pending such exercise, status quo as on that date shall be maintained. The petitioners submitted detailed explanation on 24.11.2019 requesting the 4th respondent to drop further action pursuant to the notice dated 04.04.2018. Even though two times notices were given to the petitioners to appear before the 4th respondent for hearing on 09.12.2019, 16.12.2019 and 23.12.2019, no opportunity was given to the petitioners to put forth their objections. However, the 4th respondent passed the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 directing the petitioners to evict from aquaculture tanks within 7 days. It appears that the petitioners submitted their applications on 07.11.2019 to the respondent authorities through Mee seva seeking final registration certificate. The respondents are under obligation to dispose of the said application within a period of one month as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15. The petitioner filed another W.P.No.2701 of 2020 questioning the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 stating that pending consideration of their application for issuance of final registration certificate, the impugned notice dated 28.01.2020 is passed directing the petitioners to evict from aquaculture within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order. This court disposed of the writ petition on 6 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 02.03.2020 directing the respondents to dispose of online Mee seva applications submitted by the petitioners on 07.11.2019 in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order and that till such order is passed, the respondents are directed not to demolish the fish tanks. The petitioners further states that the respondent authorities rejected their application for final registration on 30.04.2020 simply referring to the orders of this court in W.P.No.2701 of 2020 during lockdown period. It is the further case of the petitioners that they again submitted Mee seva applications in the month of May, 2020 bearing No.FR.No.12000018653 and FR.No.12000018652 dated 08.05.2020 seeking final registration of the fish tanks. The grievance of the petitioners is that in spite of orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.23259 of 2017 the respondent authorities are harassing them by passing impugned order dated 28.01.2020 and pursuant to the said notice, the petitioners were asked to evict from fish ponds at the instance of the 7th respondent, which is illegal and arbitrary. Being aggrieved by the order dated 28.01.2020, this writ petition came to be filed.
The Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari (FAC) filed counter, along with vacate petition I.A.No.4 of 2020, stating that the petitioners, without obtaining final registration as required under the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7, are doing prawn culture in RS.No.2-2, 2-3, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4A, 3-4B, 3-5, 3-5A, 3-5A2, 3-6A, 3- 6B, 4-1, 4-3A, A1, 3-5,A2, 3-6A, 3-6B, 4-14-3A, A1, 4-3A1, B, 4-3B, 4-5, 11-1 to an extent of Ac.8.63 cents and in RS.No.4-4, 10-1, 11-1 7 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 to an extent of Ac.4.00 cents in violation of the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7. The petitioners had dug the fish tanks by obtaining provisional registration certificate for rearing fresh water fish. The petitioners had dug the fish tanks and filled the fish tanks with bore well water and fitted with aerators and cultivating the prawn culture instead of fresh water fish. The petitioners are illegally doing prawn culture without obtaining final registration certificate as required, even for fresh water fish culture under the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15 and they are doing prawn culture in violation of the orders passed by this court in W.P.No.23259 of 2017, dated 17.07.2017 in W.P.No.35924 of 2017 and batch dated 11.12.2017. In spite of several notices to stop the prawn culture, the petitioners are doing prawn culture under the guise of the orders in this writ petition and they are resorting to prawn culture and harvesting the crop in utter violation of orders of this court and guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 26.05.2015.
The 7th respondent also filed counter along with vacate petition in I.A.No.3 of 2020, contending almost all in similar lines of the counter of the respondents 2 to 5. The 7th respondent stated that the lands in their village are more fertile, double crop wet lands, as the lands are located at Peddabaduva, near Padmanabhakodu Drain Water Canal. The 7th respondent and other villagers are using the canal water for their agricultural purposes and cultivation is the only source of their livelihood. The 7th respondent also stated that 8 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 the petitioners were granted only provisional registration and the same was also issued violating the procedure prescribed and without putting notice to the neighbour or affected farmers. The 7th respondent also stated that the writ petitioners are doing illegal shrimp/prawn culture and caused huge damage to their agricultural fields for all these years in violation of guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.05.2015.
Sri Mantha Rajender, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are agriculturists and having lands in various survey numbers situated at Moyyeru village, Ganapavaram Mandal, West Godavari District and the lands are not viable for growing paddy crop and with an intention to cultivate aqua culture farms, they obtained provisional registration to dig fresh water fish tanks in their agricultural lands and submitted application on 07.11.2019 for grant of final registration certificate to do fresh water aquaculture. However, the same was rejected on 30.04.2020 during lock down period contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15. Pending consideration of the petitioner's application dated 07-11-2019 for grant of final registration, the respondents passed the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 contrary to G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15 and the orders passed by this court and the same is challenged in W.P.No.2701 of 2020 and the said writ petition was disposed of on 02.03.2020. Subsequent to the same, the petitioners submitted 9 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 another set of applications for final registration on 08.05.2020. Pending consideration of the applications for grant of final registration certificate and in view of the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 passed contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15, at the instance of the 7th respondent who has no locus standi to file complaints, the respondent authorities are arbitrarily interfering with the petitioners' aquaculture farms and preventing the petitioners from doing fish culture and threatening to evict them from the fish tank is illegal and arbitrary.
Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 to 5 would contend that the petitioners, without obtaining final registration certificate are resorting to shrimp/prawn culture, contrary to the orders passed by this court in W.P.No.23259 of 2017, the petitioners are rearing the shrimp/prawns in the fish tanks instead of fresh water fish by using bore well water and aerators. On inspection, the respondent authorities found that in spite of repeated orders of the respondent authorities and pursuant to the directions issued by this court, the petitioners are taking up fish/prawn culture in the said ponds with the provisional registration certificate. Thereafter, the provisional certificate is also cancelled. The petitioners should not take up the shrimp/prawn culture in the fish tanks.
Sri Pasala Ponna Rao, learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent submits that the petitioners are illegally resorting to prawn/fish culture in the fish ponds contrary to the guidelines issued 10 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15 and the orders of this Court passed in W.P.No.23259 of 2017 and batch dated 17.07.2017 and also the orders passed in W.P.No.35924 of 2017, dated 11.12.2017 wherein this court specifically directed the petitioners not to sow any seeds in any of the fish/prawn tanks and cultivate and the respondents 2 to 5 therein shall ensure that the petitioners shall comply with the said direction. On inspection of the 4th respondent, it is found that the petitioners are using bore well water in the fish tanks and aerators are running and prawn culture is going on, which is prohibited. Even according to the guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15, fresh water fish culture is only permitted, but not the shrimp or prawn culture in the fish tanks. The counsel further states that the present writ petition is not maintainable challenging the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 as the same was challenged in W.P.No.2701 of 2020 and the same was disposed on 02.03.2020. The present writ petition is barred by res judicata and the petitioners are not entitled for any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the petitioners are resorting to prawn culture in violation of the orders passed by this court and as per the orders of this court, the petitioners were given full and fair opportunity before passing the impugned order dated 28.01.2020 and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions of the counsel and on perusal of the record, this court found that the petitioners, having obtained 11 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 provisional registration for fresh water fish tanks, dug the fish tanks and started prawn culture, even before obtaining final registration certificate as required under G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15. As per clause 7.29 of the guidelines made therein, the respondent authorities on intimation that the fish tanks are dug in pursuance of the provisional registration certificate and after satisfying with the compliance of the guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15, the respondent authorities will issue final registration certificate for rearing the fresh water fish in the fish tanks. But the petitioner, without obtaining final registration certificate, resorted for doing illegal shrimp/prawn culture, which culture is prohibited in the fish tanks. Based on the inspection report submitted by the Fisheries Department, the District Collector, being the Chairman of the District Level Committee, came to the conclusion that the petitioners have dug the bore wells in contravention of the provisions of the A.P. Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 and using saline water for rearing the shrimp culture and also aerators are fitted in the tanks contrary to the orders dated 01.01.2018 of the District Collector, passed as per the orders of this Court and directed to stop the fish culture and to evict the aquaculture within seven days. Accordingly, the respondents are also directed to take appropriate action to stop prawn culture of the petitioners. The 4th respondent issued notice dated 12.03.2018 to the petitioners to evict the aquaculture farms. The petitioners filed W.P.No.10321 of 2018 and obtained interim suspension of the notice dated 12.03.2018. Being aggrieved by the 12 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 said interim order, the 7th respondent filed W.A.No.621 of 2018 and after hearing at length, the petitioners sought permission for withdrawal of W.P.No.10321 of 2018 and W.P.No.10298 of 2018 with a liberty to file fresh writ petition. Accordingly, the petitioners were permitted to withdraw writ petition and the writ appeals were also disposed of. Again, the petitioners filed the present writ petition against the order dated 28.01.2020 issued by the 4th respondent, wherein the petitioners were directed to evict the fish tanks, and this court suspended the said order on 19.06.2020 till 03.07.2020, thereafter the said order has not been extended further. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities are interfering with the petitioner's activity of aquaculture, pending consideration of the application for final registration. Even though the earlier applications dated 07-11-2019 are rejected on 30.04.2020, it is only the subsequent applications dated 08.05.2020 are pending for consideration for issuance of final registration certificate. However, this court noticed that the petitioners are doing prawn culture stating that their applications are pending for consideration for grant of final registration. Any how, the petitioners are not having any right or permission to continue the prawn culture in the fish tanks dug in pursuance of the provisional registration certificate as the final registration is already rejected and subsequent applications are not maintainable and thereafter the impugned notice dated 28.01.2020 is issued stating that the petitioners are illegally doing shrimp/prawn culture instead of fresh water fish culture without obtaining final 13 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 registration certificate. Hence, they were asked to evict the fish tanks. The petitioners are resorting to shrimp/prawn culture for which there is a prohibition and only permissions are given for rearing fresh water fish in the fish tanks as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15, only after obtaining final registration, the fresh water fish culture is permitted. In spite of directions of this court in W.P.No.23259 of 2017 dated 17.12.2017 and orders in W.P.No.35924 of 2017 and batch dated 11.12.2017, wherein the petitioners are restrained to sow any fish seeds in any of the fish tanks and cultivate; and the respondents 2 to 5 herein shall ensure that the petitioners shall comply with the said direction, the petitioners, however, are resorting to shrimp/ prawn culture illegally in violation of the said order. Hence, the petitioners cannot challenge the impugned order dated 28.01.2020, which is passed as per the order of this court, on the ground that they were not given any opportunity of hearing as directed by this court in W.P.No.23259 of 2017 and 35924 of 2017, holds no water. When the petitioners are resorting to shrimp/prawn culture in the fish tanks in violation of the said order and to prevent the petitioners from resorting to shrimp/prawn culture only, the 4th respondent passed the impugned order giving details and reasons for directing the petitioners to evict the fish tanks within 7 days from the date of receipt of the notice. This court found that there is no illegality or irregularity in passing the impugned order.
14 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 In view of the above discussion and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is highly discretionary and which has to be exercised sparingly in public interest. The fish culture in the State of Andhra Pradesh is regulated by the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and 15 that too only to rear fresh water fish in the fish tanks after obtaining necessary permissions. The said guidelines are issued to prevent the damage to environment. Even, fresh water aquaculture should not be detrimental to ecology, environment. Whereas the petitioners are resorting to shrimp/prawn culture, which is prohibited, after obtaining only provisional permission for digging fresh water fish tanks. Even for rearing fresh water fish the final registration certificate is required as per guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15. The 7th respondent has approached this court only to stop the illegal prawn culture taken up by the petitioners, which is detrimental to the environment and it is in public interest. Hence, the contention of the petitioners that the 7th respondent has no locus standi to file writ petition is untenable. The petitioners are doing shrimp and prawn culture in the fish tanks, in utter violation of the orders of this court and the guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.7 and G.O.Ms.No.15. Hence, they are not entitled for any equitable relief from this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of any merits and liable to be dismissed.
15 MGR, J W.P.No.9009 of 2020 Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the A.P. State Legal Services Authority, Amaravathi, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
________________ M. GANGA RAO, J Date: 01-10-2020 Ksn Note: Issue C.C. by 4.11.2020