Yarakaraju Ramakrishnam Raju & Others vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Others

M.Ganga Rao, J

The petitioners 57 in number filed this writ petition questioning the common impugned notice dated 02.07.2018 whereby the petitioners were asked to demolish the fish tanks as being illegal 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 and contrary to the provisions of Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and the rules made thereunder and against the principles of natural justice.

This Court, on 28.9.2018 while issuing the rule nisi in I.A.No.1/2018 passed the following order:

“No coercive action shall be taken pursuant to the notice dated 02.07.2018 against the subject tanks, pending further orders”.

Now, the respondents filed I.A.No.1/2019 to vacate the interim order dated 28.9.2018.

The case of the petitioners is that they are primarily agriculturists and eking out their livelihood by cultivation. As cultivation of paddy is not profitable, they converted their agricultural lands into aquaculture ponds and they have been doing aquaculture after obtaining registrations as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. Some of them obtained provisional registrations and some of them got registered their aquaculture farms as existing fresh water fish tanks. Some of them obtained permissions from the coastal aquaculture authorities under the provisions of Section 13 of the Coastal Aquaculture Authorities Act and Rule 2 of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Rules, 2005 and conducting aquaculture in the said farms without any complaint. The 2nd respondent issued notice dated 12.3.2018 to the petitioner to vacate the above ponds within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. Some of the petitioners approached this Court by way of filing W.P.No.9976 of 2018. This Court suspended the notice on the ground that the same was not preceded by any show cause notice. Pending writ petition, the 2nd respondent again issued the impugned show cause notice dated 02.07.2018 without considering the petitioners’ reply dated 04.04.2018 to the notice. The decision to demolish the fish tanks and the impugned notice dated 02.7.2018 issued asking the petitioners to demolish the petitioners’ aquaculture is unilateral and illegal.

The Joint Director of Fisheries, West Godavari District, Eluru filed counter along with Vacate Petition stating that the petitioners are resorting to illegal prawn culture contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. A decision was taken by the District Level Aquaculture Committee on 27.06.2018 for demolishing the petitioners’ fish tanks. The petitioners were given permission only to conduct fresh water aquaculture. The petitioners are culturing the species which are not permitted by the authorities and they are not obeying the notice issued by the 2nd respondent authority. The petitioners were asked to vacate the fish ponds and there is no illegality or irregularity in issuing the impugned notice.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners obtained registrations as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013 and also some petitioners obtained permissions from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority under the provisions of Section 13 of the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act and the rules made thereunder. Some of them even got permissions to cultivate L.Vannamei prawn culture. Issuance of the impugned notice asking the petitioners to demolish the fish tanks without preceding any show cause notice is illegal and arbitrary. He further contends that this Court disposed of the earlier W.P.No.9967 of 2018 filed by some of the petitioners and the petitioners were given liberty to submit explanation to the impugned notice dated 12.3.2018 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the order and on receipt of such explanation, the competent authority is directed to take appropriate action in the matter within a period of four weeks thereafter. In view of the interim order passed by this Court suspending the impugned notice dated 12.3.2018, the respondents are directed not to take coercive steps till consideration of the explanation submitted by the petitioners and the respondent authorities are at liberty to take action in accordance with law. The petitioners were also given liberty to submit application seeking permission to cultivate L.Vannamei prawn culture and directed the respondents to consider the same and this Writ Petition can be disposed of on the similar lines.

Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries would contend that initially some of the petitioners obtained provisional registration and some of the petitioners fish tanks registered as existing fish tanks as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.3.2013 and G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.5.2015 and the petitioners are given permissions to take up fresh water fish culture in the fish tanks but they are resorting for L.Vannamei prawn culture, which culture is prohibited by the authorities. As per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.31 dated 10.07.2018, L. Vannamei prawn culture can be taken up only in the case of ponds situated in aquaculture zones and where provision of for release of waste water of the fish tanks into the drainage channels. Even the permissions granted by the Coastal Aquaculture Authority are only for limited period. The petitioners are cultivating the fish and prawn culture without obtaining necessary permissions under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 (in short the Act, 2020) and the rules made thereunder and the petitioners are not entitled even to continue the fresh water fish culture in the ponds unless permissions are obtained under the Act, 2020. Permissions obtained from the Coastal Aquaculture Authorities Act expired long back and the petitioners are not entitled to continue any fresh water fish culture and prawn culture in the said ponds.

In the facts and circumstances and considering the submissions made by the counsel and perused the record, this Court found that the petitioners have to obtain fresh permissions/renewals of the existing permissions for continuation of the fresh water fish culture under the provisions of the Act, 2020. Without obtaining those permissions, the petitioners are not entitled to continue the aquaculture, much less, the fresh water aquaculture. As contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the petitioners are not entitled for any permission for continuation of L. Vannamei prawn culture if the ponds are situated outside the aquaculture zones. Continuation of the petitioners fresh water aquaculture/ cultivating L. Vannamei prawn culture is found to be illegal 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 and G.O.Ms.No.31 dated 10.7.2018. In view of the subsequent development and in view of latest enactment Act, 2020 and the rules made thereunder, even though the impugned notice is issued on 02.07.2018 without preceded by any show cause notice calling for explanation as per the decision taken by the District Level Authority and the same is suspended by this Court, the same could not entitle the petitioners to continue the fresh water aquaculture, much less, taking up L. Vannamei prawn culture in the fish tanks without obtaining any necessary permission/renewals under the provisions of the Act, 2020 and the rules made thereunder. In those circumstances, this Court felt it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition giving liberty to the petitioners to make individual applications along with necessary documents to obtain renewal of the existing permits or fresh permissions as per the provisions of the Act, 2020 and the rules made thereunder within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on submission of such applications, the respondent authorities/authorities under the provisions of the Act, 2020 are directed to consider the same as per the provisions of law and pass appropriate reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter. Till consideration of the individual applications submitted by the petitioners and taking appropriate decision, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps for closing or demolishing the fish tanks. If the petitioners fail to file such applications as directed by this Court, the respondent authorities are at liberty to proceed against the petitioners as per law. Accordingly, the 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.