LAWS(APH)-2012-2-112

FISHERMEN YOUTH WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT

Decided On February 28, 2012
Fishermen Youth Welfare Association Appellant
V/S
Ministry Of Environment Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court enjoined in Article 226 of the Constitution to grant Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in constructing a road protruding into the sea at Rishikonda, Chinagadila mandal, Visakhapatnam district as unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to remove all debris put up and restore the Rishikonda beach into its original shape as per CRZ Notification. The factual matrix of the case, as narrated by the writ petitioners is as follows:

(2.) The respondent No. 4 has filed counter denying the allegations made by the writ petitioners specifically. His claim further is that the sea at Rishikonda beach is very rough and the fishermen cannot venture to go into the sea comfortably from there. However, there is arrangement of boulders on existing rock bed area by which the interest of the fishermen community is not affected in any way. As a matter of fact, from the top of it, the fishermen community is venturing into the sea and also is getting back to the shore. Further, they keep their boats, large in number in that area. Further, they have not taken up any worthy reclamation of land nor constructed any structure at the beach. In fact, loose boulders were placed on the existing rock bed there to have some sort of tranquility of water and also to avoid ferocious waves. Because they have not violated any CRZ Regulations no clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forest is obtained for the said activities. Further, there is no commercial activity organized by the authorities by way of establishing shops, snack balls, hotels etc., for the purpose of recreating the Tourists, whereas only boating activity is being organized depending upon the condition of the sea for the benefit of the Tourists.

(3.) The writ petitioners have filed reply asserting their stand taken in the writ petition and further emphasizing that photographs of the beach taken fully assert their claim.