RANGARAJU K Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these Writ Petitions though the relief is claimed in different ways but the common issue that arises for consideration is the validity of Notification issued in G.O.Ms.No. 76, Environment, Forest, Science & Technology (Forest III) Department, dated 25-9-1995 under Section 18 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act (for short 'the Act') and whether the petitioners could be prohibited from carrying on pisciculture in the lands owned or occupied by them till final notification under Section 26-A of the Act is issued.

(2.) The petitioners in some of these writ petitions are the owners of various extents of land situated in West Godavari and Krishna Districts abutting Kolleru lake. It is their case that they have been conducting agricultural operations for some time but as the time went on it became uneconomic for them to conduct conventional agricultural system and therefore, they converted the land into fishing tanks and rearing the fish for commercial purposes. Some of the petitioners are lessees of Government land and they contend that the Government has leased out certain lands in the area abutting Kolleru lake and the leases were granted for purposes of fish tanks for eking out livelihood. Some others are D-Form patta holders and they have dug the fish ponds and rearing the fish for sale. The petitioners also contend that they have already converted the land into fish tanks and they are trying to repair the tanks, the authorities are interfering with the repair work. It is stated by the petitioners that Kolleru lake is one of the largest sweet water lakes in the country and it is the biggest shallow water lake in Asia. The major drains have been let out into the streams leading into the lake. The lake is connected to Sea at Upputeru point. Apart from regular lowering of water level due to the heavy silting, there is heavy inflow of polluted drain water from the cities of Vijayawada, Eluru and Gudivada, etc., and that a part of heavy industrial wastes are diverted to the lake, on account of which the economic viability of agriculture had dwindled but, however, it was found that the pisciculture was found to be more economical in view of the changed circumstances and most of the petitioners have taken to fishing industry. But, however, after the judgment of the Supreme Court in S. Jagannadh vs. Union of India the authorities have been interfering with the fishing operations conducted by the petitioners on the ground that the area fell in the CRZ (Coastal Regulation Zone). But, however, it appears that the Government have again clarified that this Kolleru Lake did not fall in the CRZ area. But, at the same time the Government issued Notification under Section 18 of the Act in G.O.Ms.No. 76, Environment, Forest, Science & Technology (Forest-Ill) Department, dated 25-9-1995. The proclamation under Section 21 was also published in the District Gazette on 7-1-1997. However, no final notification has been issued. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioners that until final notification under Section 26-A is issued, the authorities are not entitled to interfere with the fishing operations conducted by the petitioners by converting the lands into fish tanks. It is also their case that fishing operation is undertaken on conventional basis and it is not done on large scale commercial basis. Therefore, there will not be any threat for ecology or environment if the petitioners are permitted to continue fishing operations in the area. It is also the case of the petitioners that the area notified under Section 18 is impossible for conversion into sanctuary since the Government will not be able to pay the enormous compensation to the owners. Therefore, in the nutshell they submit that the respondents may be restrained from interfering with the activities of rearing and catching of fish in the tanks raised by them. It is also the further case of the petitioners that until final notification is issued, it is not permissible for the authorities to interfere with such activity as admittedly some of the petitioners are owners of the land and some of them are lessees and some of them have been assigned the land for purpose of developing the fish ponds.

(3.) In the counter filed by the Collector, Krishna District, the history of the Kolleru lake has been traced out. It is stated that Kolleru lake and its Ecological support system stretches out over and above 2,50,000 acres in Krishna and West Godavari Districts between the two major river basins of Krishna and Godavari. It is functioning as a natural flood balancing reservoir between the two deltas. The lake was fed directly by the seasonal rivers, Budameru and Tammileru apart from 30 flowing drains and channels, most of them go dry in summer. The Budameru River brings in raw sewage from the city of Vijayawada and untreated sewage from the surrounding towns of Eluru and Gudivada and thus, it exceeded nutrient content. Another reason for increasing nutrient content is the flow of heavy drainage water and consequential formation of silt beds. It was also found that the fishing tanks were allowed in Kolleru lake and it deteriorated the quality of water due to inflows of untreated upstream urban sewage, agricultural waste and discharge of industrial activity. It was decided to restrict the drainage due to haphazard raising of fish tank bunds. Even the Government was considering the importance of the lake and to preserve the Ecology system. The Government have also issued directions prohibiting fishery tanks in the area and the leases already given to the various persons were directed not to be renewed and accordingly after 1982 no lease either to Societies or to the individuals were renewed. It is the case of the Government that patta holders-petitioners have no right to convert the land into fishing tanks and same is prohibited under the Board Standing Order No. 7 (BSO). No permission was granted to the petitioners for conversion of land into fishing tanks. Some of the petitioners have encroached the Government land and escavated the fish tanks, with plus five contour area of Kolleru and if the fish tanks are allowed, the free flow of Kolleru water will be affected and flora in the surrounding villages will be inundated. It is also the case of the respondents that as the area is covered under Coastal Regulatory Zone as per the directions of the Supreme Court, acquaculture is prohibition.