Marine Fisheries Cooperative Society vs State Of Ap And Others

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J

The petitioner society was registered under the Cooperative Societies Act in the year 2021 with an objective to provide support to its members to do fishing and crab catching.

It appears from the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, there is dispute among the two villages i.e. Jinkapalem village of Nagayalanka Mandal and Petitioner’s village-Nachugunta.

Be that as it may, one Pedasingu Mahalakshmayya resident of Jinkapalem village filed W.P. No.5459 of 2024 to declare the inaction of the official respondents therein in disposing of the representation dated 04.09.2023 in preventing the traps/ baskets / placing in the water with a rotten meat / spoiled fish / cats, in water, canal shores, in huge mangrove forest, to catch wild animals in the limits of Jinkapalem village, Nagayalanka Mandal. As if the society, using the wrong methods in catching fishes. The said representation was disposed of vide order dated 01.03.2024 directing the petitioner therein to submit a fresh representation to the Forest Range Officer within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the order and on receipt of the fresh representation, the 3rd respondent is directed to conduct enquiry and initiate action against persons using trap boxes within a period of four weeks there from.

As per the orders in W.P. No.5459 of 2024, the respondent authorities have conducted a meeting on 17.08.2024. In the meeting, the people of both the villages i.e. Nachugunta and Jinkapalem were called for by the official respondents as per the directive issued by this Court in W.P. No.5459 of 2024. And it is declared as false that cause of the death of wild animals due to the use of traps/ baskets and using of rotten meat, fish and other materials.

Now, the petitioner-society contends that not allowing the petitioners to catch fishes and crabs without placing trap boxes / baskets would amounts to violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India and inter alia prayed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner-society to catch fishes and crabs within their river area limits for their livelihood basing upon the meeting conducted on 17.08.2024.

The 2nd respondent-fisheries department filed counter affidavit and stated that crab fishing area comes under the mangrove forest area and it is under the forest department and the forest department is the authority to take decision.

The 5th respondent-Forest Range Officer filed counter affidavit stating that the villagers can do fishing or crab catching only for the bonafide need and in the present case, the petitioners or Nachugunta villagers are deploying huge number of traps or cages for crab catching and inturn being sold in the market, which is a commercial activity, which is against the Wild Life (P) Act, 1972. The method of placing decomposed meet is polluting the water in the surrounding areas resulting in loss of aquatic life. The method of deploying trap boxes or cages is not traditional method and this method of crab catching depletes the natural resources affecting the mangrove vegetation. In the method of crab catching will cause a grave threat to the biodiversity and thereby there is a chance of extinction of the crab species within no time and which leads to imbalance in mangrove eco system and biodiversity. The traditional method of crab catching is deploying ring nets. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

On careful examination of the minutes of the meeting held on 17.08.2024, that it is stated the death of wild animals is not because of fall and die in the crab trap boxes and there is a border dispute between the neighbouring villages but the department has nothing to do with that and the report dated 18.08.2024 of the Divisional Forest Officer that it clearly spelt out that there was no instance of fishing cats getting trapped in the boxes or crab traps.

The resolution passed in the meeting held on 17.12.2024 is binding on both the petitioners and respondents and neighbouring villagers and it is deemed to be in force till today, it is not being implemented. Hence, there shall be a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner-society to do traditional catching of fish within the area of their village limits of catchment area. However, the petitioner-society shall give undertaking to the Forest Range Officer not to cause any harm to wild animals.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.