Aquaculture: court dismisses writ pleas

By Our Legal Correspondent

HYDERABAD, MARCH 13. Mr. Justice B. Sudershan Reddy of the AP High Court has made it clear that the authorities are duty-bound to interfere and stop activities such as aquaculture to prevent damage to the irrigation systems and common resources.

The judge has refused to come to the rescue of aquaculturists who have raised prawn ponds in an irrigation tank of Krishnapatnam, Nellore district.

The court was dismissing a batch of writ petitions filed by several persons, complaining against interference by the authorities with the activity taken up in their own lands and seeking a direction restraining the authorities from interfering with the aquaculture.

Their allegation was that the District Collector had inspected the lands and ordered action contrary to the law. Initially, interim orders were passed in favour of these aquaculturists. A separate writ petition was filed by a farmer complaining that the irrigation tank was occupied by some persons and they had raised bunds for prawn ponds and the authorities were not taking action to protect the tank. The irrigation authorities submitted records to show that the tank had been in existence for the last 50 years and that there was a large aycut. The revenue officers produced the inspection report of the District Collector and the reports of the A.P. Pollution Control Board.

Mr. Justice Sudershan Reddy said that the court appreciated the action of the District Collector, who had heeded to the complaints of the farmers. He made it clear that ``maybe they are owners of the lands but they cannot be permitted to indulge in any activity adversely affecting the very existence of the irrigation system and the tank itself.''

``These alleged owners of the lands which fell within the tankbed were free to cultivate lands when they were not submerged, but cannot resort to aquaculture,'' the judge said.

Referring to the report of the Pollution Control Board, the judge asked: ``Can this court prevent the authorities from interfering in the matter with a view to stopping the ongoing macabre drama enacted by aquaculturists?''. The court referred to the Supreme Court judgment regarding prawn culture and said that the conversion of the tankbed into prawn ponds was contrary to the Supreme Court judgment, and said that any order to prevent the authorities from acting will amount to compelling the authorities to act contrary to the apex court judgment.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Cong. stalls proceedings, stages walk-out
Next     : Govt. to consider bringing CMO under Lok Ayukta