News Item Titled "Alarming Decline in Magrove Forests Amid Vizag,S Growth" Appearing in the Deccan Chronicle Dated 16.11.2024 vs

NGT22 Nov 2024Original Application No. 1321/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal registered this Original Application suo-motu based on a news item reporting the alarming decline of mangrove forests in Vishakhapatnam due to urbanization. The Tribunal impleaded several statutory authorities as respondents, directed them to file responses, and transferred the matter to the Southern Zonal Bench, Chennai.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to respondents to file reply by affidavit; matter transferred to Southern Zonal Bench, Chennai; next hearing listed.

News Item Titled "Alarming Decline in Magrove Forests… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No. 03

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 1321/2024

¶5

News Item titled "Alarming decline in mangrove forests amid vizag’s growth" appearing in the Deccan Chronicle dated 16.11.2024

¶6

Date of hearing: 22.11.2024

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶8

ORDER

¶9

This original application is registered suo-motu on the basis of the news item titled “Alarming decline in mangrove forests amid vizag’s growth” appearing in the Deccan Chronicle dated 16.11.2024.

¶10

The matter relates to the severe decline in Vishakhapatnam’s vital mangrove forests, due to rapid development and urbanization. As per the article, the once sprawling coastal ecosystems have now been reduced to mere patches, raising serious concerns among environmentalists about coastal protection and biodiversity loss.

¶11

The news item highlights that the loss of mangroves poses a serious risk to both coastal protection and biodiversity, as mangroves play a crucial role in preventing shoreline erosion and providing habitat for various bird species. It is alleged that the number of mangrove and halophyte patches has sharply decreased over the years. In 1989, there were six mangrove patches and seven halophyte patches; by 2008, halophyte patches had reduced to four, while mangrove patches remained at six. However, by 2023, the number of mangrove patches had dwindled to just three, even as the number of halophyte patches increased to seven.

¶12

¶13

Furthermore, it is stated that the impact on bird biodiversity has been particularly severe. Previously, these areas supported remarkable avian diversity: 66 species at the Gosthani River mouth, 93 species at another location along the same river, 159 species downstream at Meghadri Gedda, 90 species at a nearby water body, 88 species near Vizag Airport, and 99 species near the Visakhapatnam Port Trust mangroves. Alarmingly, the usual arrival of migratory birds in midNovember 2023 was not observed, indicating a disturbing change in these crucial habitats.

¶14

Moreover, The Meghadri Gedda area, which flows into the Bay of Bengal near Visakhapatnam Harbour, exemplifies this decline. Once flourishing with mangroves, the area from the Naval Dockyard to the Meghadri Gedda reservoir near the Visakhapatnam International Airport has been significantly reduced, primarily due to construction debris and encroachment. The article alleges that despite conservation efforts, including a 2016 initiative by the Visakhapatnam Port Trust to restore mangroves over 50 acres, progress has been minimal. The Gosthani river mouth mangroves in Bheemili have dwindled to approximately 150-200 individual plants.

¶15

The news item also highlights a 2023 study by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education-Coastal Ecosystem Centre (ICFRECEC) identified around 220 hectares of mangrove patches in the district, which were not included in the Forest Survey of India's biennial mapping .

¶16

The above matter indicates violation of the provisions of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notifications, 2011; Biodiversity Act, 2002; Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 and the Environment Protection Act, 1980.

¶17

¶18

The news item raises substantial issue relating to compliance of the environmental norms and implementation of the provisions of scheduled enactment.

¶19

Power of the Tribunal to take up the matter suo-motu has been recognized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors.” reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 897 .

¶20

Hence, we implead the following as respondents:

¶21

(i) Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary

¶22

A.P. Pollution Control Board, D.No. 33-26-14 D/2, Near Sunrise Hospital, Pushpa Hotel Centre, Chalamalavari Street, Kasturibaipet, Vijayawada – 520010

¶23

(ii) Central Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary

¶24

Central Pollution Control Board, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi – 110032

¶25

(iii) Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority, Through its Member Secretary

¶26

AP Coastal Zone Management Authority, Department of Environment, Forests, Science & Technology Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati – 522503

¶27

(iv) Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, (Regional Office)

¶28

Regional Office (South Eastern Zone), 1st and 2nd Floor, Handloom Export Promotion Council 34, Cathedral Garden Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600034

¶29

(v) Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, Through its Vice Chairman

¶30

¶31

Udyog Bhavan Complex, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam – 530003

¶32

(vi) Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education, Through its Director General

¶33

P.O. New Forest, Dehradun – 248006

¶34

(vii) District Magistrate, Visakhapatnam

¶35

Collectorate Complex, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam - 530002

¶36

Issue notice to the above respondents for filing their response/reply by way of affidavit before the Southern Zonal Bench of the Tribunal at least one week before the next date of hearing. If any respondent directly files the reply without routing it through his advocate then the said respondent will remain virtually present to assist the Tribunal.

¶37

Since the matter relates to the Southern Zonal Bench, Chennai, therefore, OA is transferred to the Southern Zonal Bench. Therefore, the original record of this OA be transferred to the Southern Zonal Bench, Chennai for further action.

¶38

List before Southern Zonal Bench at Chennai on 10.01.2025.

¶39

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶40

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶41

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶42

November 22, 2024 Original Application No. 1321/2024 A..

¶43

News Item Titled "Alarming Decline in Magrove Forests Amid Vizag,S Growth" Appearing in the Deccan Chronicle Dated 16.11.2024 vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

News Item Titled "Alarming Decline in Magrove Forests Amid Vizag,S Growth" Appearing in the Deccan Chronicle Dated 16.11.2024 vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Raju Goyal vs State of Maharashtra through Mira Bhaindar Municipal Corporation

Shantinath Devappa Hukkeri vs Dunung Industries Pvt. Ltd. through Director Pritam Prafulla Dunung

Gaurav Chaturvedi vs State of Gujarat through District Magistrate Surat

Shalbhjit Singh vs

Bajrang Agarwal vs

Swaminathan vs

Akash Dubey vs Union of India

Monu vs State of Uttarakhand

Banke Bihari Process vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee

Banke Bihari Process vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee

Kundan Veer Singh Bhullar and Ors. vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Kissan Udey Samiti vs State of Haryana

News Item Titled "Local Lifeline Nature,S Timeline Varkala Cliffs Threatened by Climate and Human Activities" Appearing in Mongabay Dated 30.10.2024 vs

Naresh Kumar Yadav vs Union of India