The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Sub Collector's order imposing conditions on respondents operating prawn tanks. The Court suggested the petitioners file fresh representations if operations continue beyond the permission period.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
KVL, J WP No.7564 of 2010
HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
Writ Petition No.7564 of 2010
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed „to declare the proceedings dated 29.06.2009 issued by the Sub Collector, Narsapur, West Godavari District-3rd respondent herein, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, the petitioners are seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 7 to remove the prawn tanks of respondents 8 and 9 situated in RS Nos.642, 644/1-A, 646, 648 and 649 of Poduru village & Mandal, West Godavari District.‟
Case of the petitioners is that, they own agricultural lands in various survey numbers in Poduru Mandal of West Godavari district; petitioners earlier filed WP No.10270 of 2008 seeking to declare the action of respondents 1 to 7 herein in not taking any action for removal of prawn tanks of respondents 8 and 9 in RS Nos.642, 644/1-A, 645/2, 646, 648 and 649 of Poduru village, as illegal and arbitrary; the said writ petition was disposed of on 02.05.2008 observing as follows:
“Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and both of them agreed for disposal of the writ petition with the following directions:
Respondents 2, 3 and 7, namely the Revenue authorities are directed to consider and dispose of the writ petition dated 04.04.2008 of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, expeditiously.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.”
Pursuant to the said direction in the writ petition, the impugned order in
the present writ petition was passed on 29.06.2009. According to the petitioners, the unofficial respondents do not have any permission to do the aqua culture and without holding enquiry and without issuing any notice to the petitioners, the impugned order was passed with an intention to help the unofficial respondents. No notice of the joint inspection was given to
2
KVL, J WP No.7564 of 2010
the petitioners nor was the same conducted in the presence of the petitioners. Hence the writ petition.
Counter-affidavit is filed by the 7th respondent-Tahsildar stating inter-alia that the impugned proceedings were passed after verifying the revenue records, after conducting the joint field inspection and enquiry on 17.12.2008; petitioners and others were informed to attend the open enquiry; petitioners and the unofficial respondents are close relatives; even though petitioners attended the field inspection, they refused to sign on the attendance sheet; the 1st petitioner is also indulged in aqua culture activities; the unofficial respondents have taken permission from the aquaculture authority under G.O.Ms.No.83 Animal Husbandry, Diary Development and Fisheries (F-II) Department dated 12.09.2007 for the tenure 29.01.2009 to 28.01.2014.
No counter-affidavit is filed by the unofficial respondents 8 and 9. No reply is filed by the petitioners to the counter-affidavit of the official respondents.
In the impugned proceedings dated 29.06.2009, the Sub Collector imposed the following conditions on the unofficial respondents.
“1. He shall not release the waste water into Bodi, without
the prior permission of drainage/irrigation officials;
The drainage officials are hereby asked to check the pipes and measure the hydraulic particulars regarding discharge and bearing capacity of bodi and take action accordingly. The irrigation officials are hereby asked to ensure irrigation water to the petitioners fields subject to prevailing supply conditions.”
3
KVL, J WP No.7564 of 2010
As seen from the counter-affidavit, permission granted to the unofficial respondents expired by 28.01.2014 and there is no interim direction in the writ petition.
In the facts and circumstances, if the unofficial respondents are operating the aquaculture prawn tanks contrary to their permission which was granted to them, it is always open to the petitioners to give fresh representation to the authorities concerned and if such representation is made, the authorities concerned are directed to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
__________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J
Date: 14.02.2022 BSS
4
KVL, J WP No.7564 of 2010
HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
Writ Petition No.7564 of 2010
33
Date: 14.02.2022
BSS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Sub Collector's order imposing conditions on unofficial respondents regarding waste water release from prawn tanks is arbitrary.
Whether the petitioners were required to attend the joint field inspection for the prawn tanks.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction for removal of prawn tanks.
Petitioners
Sub Collector, Narsapur
Tahsildar
Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
