Disposed

Vempulu Sudhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Feb 2024WP/4431/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an eviction notice for aquaculture ponds alleging violation of natural justice and lack of permission. The court treated the final notice as a show-cause notice, directed the petitioner to submit an explanation within two weeks, and reserved judgment on initiating action thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to submit an explanation to the final notice within two weeks to be treated as a show-cause notice. Reserved action to initiate penalties after consideration.

Vempulu Sudhakar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 4431 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Vempulu Sudhakar, S/o. Yanadaiah, Aged about 52 years, Occ: Agriculturist, R/o. Koduru Kandriga village, Thotapalli Guduru Mandal,^{SPSRNeHoreDistrict.}

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Andhra Pradesh, Animal, Husbandry, Dairy Development^and Fisheries Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amavarathi, Guntur District, Rep. by its Principal Secretary.

¶11

The District Level Committee, Rep.by its Chairman-cum-The District Collector, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Joint Director of Fisheries., Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶13

Fisheries Development Officer, Fish Seed Farm, Thotapalli Gudur, SPSR Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶14

Nellipudi Subbarami Reddy, S/o N.Raiga Reddy, Aged about 73 years, Occ Farmer, R/o Eduru Village and Post, Thotapalli Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 524331.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly in the nature of a writ of Mandamus under article 226 of the constitution of India declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the final notice dt.25.01.2024 directing the petitioner to evict the ponds within a period of 2 days and directing to level the aqua farms immediately and further directing not to do aquaculture in future in the land i.e., an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Old Sy.No.2-41 and L.P.No.129, situated at Thotapalli Guduru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and one without Jurisdiction and in contravention of APSADA Act, 2020 and consequently direct the respondents to receive the application made by the petitioner for permission to do aquaculture in the land i.e., an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Old Sy.No.2-41 and L.P.No.129, situated at Thotapalli Guduru Nellore District and further direct the respondents not to demolish the ponds by setting aside the final notice dt.25.01.2024, issued by the 4‘^ respondent.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to receive the application made by the petitioner for permission to do aquaculture in the land i.e., an extent^{ofAc.0.82centsinOld} Sy.No.2-41 and L.P.No.129, situated atThotapalli Guduru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District by suspending the final notice dt.25.01.2024, issued by the 4th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C SUBODH

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ANIMAL HUSBANDARY

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner is having agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Sy.No.2-41, situated at Koduru Kandika Village, Thotapalli Guduru Mandal, SPSR Nellore^{Districtandthe} same was purchased from one Thammireddy Venkata Seshaiah under Registered Sale Deed No. 1049/2009, dated 11.08.2009. After purchasing the said land, the petitioner converted the same into Aquaculture pond and doing fresh water aquaculture without causing any inconvenience to the adjacent land owners. 2. It is further submitted that the 5* respondent herein made a complaint to the 4* respondent that due to seepage from petitioner’s ponds he is unable to do agriculture in his land to an extent^{ofAc.2.73centsin} Sy.No.2-40. Basing on the instructions of 4^^ respondent, the petitioner removed the bund adjacent to 5^*^ respondent’s land and established seepage channel. Subsequently, the respondent filed W.P.No.31582 of 2023 before this Court praying to evict the petitioner from the illegal and unlicensed aquaculture farm, and the said Writ Petition was disposed of vide orders dated 07.12.2023 directing the official respondents to take appropriate steps in preventing the petitioner herein from doing illegal

¶24

¶25

aquaculture activities in the disputed aqua ponds.^Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.31582 of 2023, the 4^^ respondent issued final notice, dated 25.01.2024, to the petitioner directing^him to evict the ponds within a period of two (2) days from the date of receiving the notice and also directed to level the ponds and also further directed not to do any aquaculture in future. It is further submitted that the 4* respondent in pursuance to the order dated 07.12.2023, straight away^issuedthe final notice without issuing any show-cause notice. Even though, the petitioner made an application for permission, the same is not received and processed. Hence, the writ petition.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Animal Husbandary appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of the notice, dated 25.01.2024, it appears that it is not^{intheformofshow-cause} notice but it is a final notice directing the petitioner to vacate the ponds within two (2) days from the date of receipt of this^{noticeandalsolevelthe} ponds and further the petitioner was also directed not to take up any aquaculture in future. The said notice has been issued in pursuance to the order, dated 07.12.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.31582^of2023.

¶28

At the time of hearing, learned Government Pleader for Animal Husbandaiy has stated that the 7^ respondent therein^{inW.P.No.31582of} 2023, who is the petitioner herein has converted his land into aquaculture without obtaining permission from the competent authority as required under G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 16.03.2013 and APSADA Act,^{2020.Inviewofthe}

¶29

same, respondent authorities taken appropriate steps against the petitioner from doing illegal aquaculture activities in the disputed aqua ponds. Therefore, a noUce, dated 25.01.2024, was issued to the petitioner. 6. A perusal of the said notice it appears that it is a final notice, but not a show-cause notice calling for an explanation from the petitioner as to why achon shall not be initiated for conducting illegal aquaculture in his land without obtaining proper permission from the authorities. 7. In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the petitioner to submit an explanation to the notice, dated 25.01.2024, by treating it as a show-cause notice, to the 4th respondent, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the 4th respondent shall consider the said explanation submitted by the petitioner and shall pass appropriate orders and then initiate action against the petitioner herein, in accordance with law.

¶30

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶32

//TRUE COPY//

¶33

Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶34

To, 1 The Princioal Secretary State of Andhra Pradesh,^{Animal,Husbandry,Dairy} Amavarathi, DevetopmSi^Sries Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, 2 ThrChaiman-cum-The District Collector, District Level^{Committee,Nellore,} 3'. ?h"l?orn!'!?iSrS'FiS.%^ere, SPSR Nellore District,^Andhra

¶35

4 Ttepfsheries Development Officer, Fish Seed Farm,^{ThotapalliGudur,SPSR} Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶36

I; HL^^Sp^^f^rTnf^arSa^ry^VIrih Court of Andhra Pradesh.^[OUT, 7. Two CD Copies

RAM gl

HIGH COURT

DATED;20/02/2024

ORDER

WP.No.4431 of 2024

•
H i '■'S.
4
-n •Xii
%
o
0

¶43

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶44

0 Cop^

¶45

"?/3)

Vempulu Sudhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vempulu Sudhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Private Recognized Aided Schools Management Association Vs State of A.P.

M/S Vasavi Agros Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Adabala Veera Venkata Laxmi Satyavathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Taluk High School Committee Vs State of Ap

Vinay Parshuram Raut S/o Parshuram Mahadev Raut Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Maddi Tataiah Company, Guntur Vs Prl Secy, Agriculture and Coop (Am-Iv) Dept, Hyd and 2 Ot