Disposed

Dr. Namala Umashri Francis v. Special Chief Secretary to the Govt of Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry Dairy Development and Fisheries Department Andhra Pradesh and Others

NGT21 Jul 2026Original Application No. 150/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NGT Southern Zone disposed of an application alleging aquaculture farms caused soil pollution and crop loss in Andhra Pradesh. A joint committee found the applicant's land issues resulted from neglect and natural salinity. The court directed authorities to regulate aquaculture and improve drainage.

What did the court decide?

Directions to regulate aquaculture, improve drainage, and create a salinity management plan; compensation for past crop loss dismissed.

Dr. Namala Umashri Francis vs Special Chief Secretary to… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.03:-

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI

¶3

Tuesday, the day of 21^st July, 2026.

¶4

(Through Physical Hearing (Hybrid Option)

¶5

Original Application No.150 of 2025 (SZ)

¶6

[Earlier O.A. No.310 of 2025(PB)LP]

¶7

IN THE MATTER OF:-

¶8

Dr. Namala Umashri Francis, Resident of Radhika Colony, Plot number 5, West Marredpally, Secunderabad, Telangana – 500026.

¶9

… Applicant(s) Versus

¶10

1. State of Andhra Pradesh Through Special Chief Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department, Andhra Pradesh, 4F – 39, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana – 500 022.

¶11

2. District Magistrate, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema Collector Office Amalapuram, Konaseema District.

¶12

3. Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) Represented by its Member Secretary, Paryavaran Bhavan, APIIC Colony Road, Gurunanak Road, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada – 520 008.

¶13

…Respondent(s)

¶14

For Applicant(s): None.

¶15

For Respondent(s): Mr. K. Ravindranath a/w. Mrs. C.P. Kavitha Renjini for R1 to R3.

¶16

Page 1 of 13

¶17

Judgment Reserved: 16^th June, 2026.

¶18

CORAM :

¶19

HON’BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE Dr. PRASHANT GARGAVA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

¶22

1. The present matter is registered based on a complaint dated 28.02.2025 sent by one Dr. Namala Umashri Francis, resident of Plot No. 5, Radhika Colony, West Marredpally, Secunderabad, Telangana, through the Public Grievances Portal of this Tribunal, which was treated as a letter petition and registered as O.A. No. 310 of 2025(PB) for exercise of Suo Motu jurisdiction by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal.

¶23

2. The complainant has, inter alia, stated as follows:

¶24

“Subject: Loss of paddy and coconuts' fields' yield due to Aqua prawn farms Photograph of Land damage, letter, and documents attached in this mail (also as pdf)

¶25

Guttenadeevi is a village in Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema district in the state of Andhra Pradesh. It is located in I. Polavaram Mandal of the Amalapuram revenue division. It is our ancestral village. My maternal grandparents and parents were holding paddy fields and coconut gardens. I have also a paddy field with coconut trees bordering the land which measures about 1.90 acres (survey no. 182-2, 182-2A; Guttenadeevi village, I. Polavaram Mandal, Dr.B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Andhra Pradesh) on which from more than 50 years paddy and coconut have been grown.

¶26

However, from past few years there has been a gradual and steady conversion of agricultural lands into aquaculture farms in the surrounding area due to which the fertility of the soil has declined drastically. No proper irrigation also has contributed to this.

¶27

In the last few years aqua prawn farms have come up in adjacent lands to my agricultural lands. I am told that this is done with the permission of the government authorities. Due to these aqua farms from last 3 years, there is no paddy growing and the yield of coconut trees have also drastically reduced due the pollution and depletion of

¶28

Page 2 of 13

¶29

nutrients of the soil. There has been absolute loss of crops from last 3 years. Now the land is in no condition to grow paddy.

¶30

I request the government to compensate us for the loss incurred due to this pollution and depletion caused due to the government irresponsibly giving permissions for aqua prawn farms without considering the effects of this action on the paddy fields. The village which was part of the Rice Bowl of India has started turning into a saltwater body. The officials at local level have not taken any action to save the green zone. I also request that the canal water way which has been hampered by all be redone so there is proper irrigation of fields and drainage of lands which is not possible now due to water logging. Please also arrange ways and means of restoring the fertility of the land.

¶31

I am very pained to see the once green heaven of lush green paddy fields of Andhra Pradesh being turned into a murky place, The once dense and green healthy coconut trees are now dry and worn out. In the long run due to all this it will also affect the health of the inhabitants of the area.

¶32

I request you to please take immediate action to save our agricultural lands and compensate us for the loss incurred on us due to the wrong decisions of the government.”

¶33

3. The applicant belongs to Guttenadeevi village, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Andhra Pradesh, where her family has owned and cultivated paddy fields and coconut gardens for generations. She also owns approximately 1.90 acres of agricultural land in Survey Nos. 182/2 and 182/2A, on which paddy and coconut have been cultivated for over fifty years.

¶34

4. It is alleged that from past few years there has been a gradual and steady conversion of agricultural lands into aquaculture farms in the surrounding area due to which the fertility of the soil has declined drastically. No proper irrigation also has contributed to this.

¶35

5. The applicant has further alleged that in the last few years aqua prawn farms have come up in adjacent lands to her agricultural lands, and as per her information, this is done with the permission of the government authorities. Due to these aqua farms and resultant pollution and depletion of nutrients of the soil, there is no paddy growing from last 3 years and the yield of coconut trees have also drastically reduced. There has been

¶36

Page 3 of 13

¶37

absolute loss of crops from last 3 years. Now the land is in no condition to grow paddy.

¶38

6. The applicant further alleges that the village, which was part of the Rice Bowl of India, has started turning into a saltwater body. The officials at the local level have not taken any action to save the green zone.

¶39

7. The applicant has prayed for the directions to the Government to compensate for the loss incurred due to this pollution and depletion caused due to the government irresponsibly giving permissions for aqua prawn farms without considering the effects of this action on the paddy fields; the canal water way which has been hampered by all be redone so there is proper irrigation of fields and drainage of lands which is not possible now due to waterlogging; and to arrange ways and means of restoring the fertility of the land.

¶40

8. In view of the environmental questions involved in the case, it was considered appropriate to constitute a Joint Committee to verify the factual position and suggest appropriate remedial action. Accordingly, a Joint Committee comprising officers duly authorized by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board (APPCB), and District Magistrate, Dr. B.R Ambedkar Konaseema was considered and directed to meet within two weeks, undertake visits to the site, look into the grievances of the applicant, associate the applicant and representative of the concerned project proponents, verify the factual position and submit report suggesting appropriate remedial action. The APPCB to be the nodal agency for coordination and compliance.

¶41

9. At this stage, the matter was transferred to this Bench and renumbered as O. A. No. 150 of 2025 (SZ).

¶42

10. The report of the Joint Committee was filed by the Respondent No. 3, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board on 09.12.2025 . The Respondent No. 2, the District Magistrate , Dr. B.R Ambedkar Konaseema District, also filed its

¶43

Page 4 of 13

¶44

report dated 16.06.2026 . Both the reports were taken on record.

¶45

11. The Respondent No. 2, the District Magistrate submitted that the applicant did not make any representation to the District Administration against Aqua culture ponds prior to filing the representation before the Hon'ble NGT (Principal Bench), New Delhi on 28.02.2025.

¶46

12. Respondent No. 3, APPCB submitted that in compliance with the aforesaid Hon’ble NGT order dated 10.07.2025, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) vide letter dated 22.08.2025 nominated Smt. Sowmya D, Scientist-E, to represent CPCB as Member of the Committee. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) vide letter dated 31.08.2025 nominated Sri M.B.S. Sankara Rao, Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, Kakinada, as the APPCB representative and Nodal Officer for the Committee. The Collector & District Magistrate, Kakinada District, vide proceedings dated 07.10.2025, authorized the i) Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram, ii) District Fisheries Officer, Fisheries Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District and iii) District Horticulture Officer, Horticulture Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District to represent the District Administration in the Joint Committee constituted by the Hon’ble NGT.

¶47

13. It is submitted that pursuant to the directions of this Tribunal, the Environmental Engineer, APPCB (Nodal Officer), vide letters dated 30.10.2025 and 03.11.2025, informed the applicant Dr. Namala Umashri Francis, resident of Plot No.5, Radhika Colony, West Marredpally, Secunderabad, Telangana, requesting her to attend the Joint Committee inspection on 11.11.2025 to present her grievance and furnish relevant information regarding the alleged loss of paddy crop productivity and decline in coconut yield on her agricultural land due to the surrounding aquaculture activities.

¶48

14. The applicant expressed her inability to attend the inspection and authorized her husband Sri Francis Agnelo to

¶49

Page 5 of 13

¶50

represent her before the Committee. The Committee interacted with Sri Francis Agnelo, who stated that the applicant owns 1.90 acres of agricultural land in Sy. Nos. 182-2 and 182-2A of Guttenadevi Village. He submitted that the land has become unfit for cultivation since 2019 due to loss of soil fertility, rendering it unsuitable for paddy cultivation. He further stated that the yield of coconut is downgraded which he attributed to the establishment of aquaculture farms in the vicinity of their agricultural land.

¶51

15. The Joint Committee inspected the applicant’s agricultural land and surrounding aquaculture ponds at Guttenadevi Village, I. Polavaram Mandal, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District on 11.11.2025.

¶52

16. The Joint Committee observed that the source of irrigation for the applicant’s agricultural land is Panta Kaluva (irrigation bodhi). During the inspection, the Committee collected water samples from i) irrigation bodhi near complainant fields; ii) Prawn cultivation pond of Sri K. Ramesh near complainant fields; iii) fishpond of Sri Chikkala Satti Babu, near complainant fields. Also, the committee collected soil sample from the applicant’s agricultural land in the presence of the Applicant.

¶53

17. It is submitted that the analysis of the water samples indicates that the irrigation water (bodhi water) to the applicant's agricultural land has a neutral to slightly alkaline pH of 7.91 and exhibits elevated levels of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) (1,824 mg/l), Chloride (580 mg/l), and sodium (482 mg/l). These parameters are indicative of moderate salinity. However, the analysis did not reveal the presence of toxic concentrations of heavy metals such as chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), cadmium (Cd), and lead (Pb).

¶54

18. The prawn cultivation pond water of Sri K. Ramesh and the fishpond of Sri Chikkala Satti Babu exhibit high TDS (8856 and 1292 mg/l, respectively), high chloride (3848 and 434 mg/l) and elevated COD/BOD (104/32 mg/l and 672/185 mg/l, respectively), which are characteristic of organic-rich, saline

¶55

Page 6 of 13

¶56

aquaculture waters. The heavy metal concentration in water are below detection levels.

¶57

19. Soil analysis results of the applicant’s agricultural land are as below:

¶58

S. No.	Parameter	Unit	Result
1.	Physical State	Visual Observation	Solid
2.	Colour		Dark Gray
3.	pH (1: 5 Ratio)	---	7.56
4.	Electrical Conductivity (1: 5 Ratio)	μS/cm	2864
5.	% Organic Carbon	%	2.27
6.	Loss on Ignition (LOI) (on dry basis)	&	0.60
7.	Loss on Drying	&	3.88

¶59

20. It is submitted that the analysis of soil samples collected from the applicant's agricultural land indicates that the soil is dark grey in colour and solid, with a pH of 7.56, signifying neutral to slightly alkaline conditions. The electrical conductivity of 2,864 μS/cm (approximately 2.86 dS/m) indicates moderate salinity, though the soil cannot be classified as highly saline. The organic carbon content of 2.27% is reasonably good, and the loss on ignition and drying values do not indicate any abnormal accumulation of inorganic or organic contaminants.

¶60

21. The Joint Committee report also includes the report of the District Fisheries Officer, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram, dated 13.11.2025, and the report of District Horticulture Officer, Dr. B.R Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram, dated 24.11.2025.

¶61

22. The report of the District Fisheries Officer, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram, dated 13.11.2025, along with G.O. Ms. No. 8, AHDD&F Department, dated 23.02.2018 and the Grama Sabha Resolution, details as follows:

¶62

It is true that lands are subjected to inundation and some farmers have resorted to Aquaculture for the past few years. But

¶63

Page 7 of 13

¶64

they have not taken any permission from the Fisheries Department as alleged by the complainant.

¶65

There are 93 Fresh water Aqua farmers with an area of 46.19 Acres and 227 Brackish water farmers with an area of l3l.3l Acres are recently converted from non-aqua zone to Aqua zone as per Government orders and Grama Sabha resolution.

¶66

23. The report of the District Horticulture Officer, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram dated 24.11.2025, recorded the observations as follows:

¶67

“The petitioner's garden comprises 55 bearing coconut palms (variety: East Coast Tall). The palms are approximately 20-25 years old”.

¶68

Visual symptoms observed on the coconut palms:

¶69

a. Severe yellowing of lower and middle whorls of leaves due to nonapplication of Nitrogen Fertilizer.

¶70

b. Premature drooping and drying of fronds due to nonapplication of Potash Fertilizer.

¶71

c. Reduced crown size and sparse canopy due to nonapplications of Fertilizer.

¶72

d. Poor nut setting; Yield was very less/ Palm /Year as against the normal yield potential of 80-120 nuts/palm/year under good management in this tract due to improper maintenance.

¶73

e. Root zone examination revealed poor root development and absence of regular manuring/irrigation marks due to improper Irrigation.

¶74

Interaction with petitioner's husband and neighboring farmers:

¶75

a. Sri Francis (husband of the petitioner) admitted that the garden has remained largely neglected for the last five years without cultural operations.

¶76

b. No regular application of recommended doses of fertilizers (NPK+ micronutrients) was carried out.

¶77

c. Irrigation was highly irregular, mostly dependent on monsoon only.

¶78

d. No soil working, basin management, or pest/disease management practices were followed.

¶79

Statements of adjacent aquaculture farmers and Sarpanch:

¶80

All the neighbouring farmers unanimously stated that their own coconut gardens, which receive regular irrigation, manuring, and intercultivation, are in excellent health with good yield (80- 110 nuts/palm/year). They further confirmed that the poor condition of the petitioner's garden is solely attributable to prolonged neglect and lack of scientific horticultural practices.

¶81

Conclusion from Horticulture perspective:

¶82

Page 8 of 13

¶83

The present Average health and reduced yield of the 55 coconut palms in the petitioner’s filed are primarily due to chronic neglect. Non-application of fertilizers, irregular irrigation, and absence of recommended agronomic practices over the past five years.

¶84

24. The conclusions recorded by the Joint Committee in its report are reproduced below:

¶85

a) The petitioner owns 1.90 acres in Sy. Nos. 182-2 & 182-2A, Guttenadevi Village. No paddy has been cultivated since 2019 and the land is presently fallow, water-logged and weed-infested.

¶86

b) Water from the Pantabodhi (irrigation source) shows moderate salinity and sodium hazard, while the waterlogged field water (C4S3 class) is highly saline and sodic, making it unsuitable for common field crops.

¶87

c) Soil analysis of the petitioner’s land indicates neutral to slightly alkaline pH and moderate salinity, with no evidence of heavy metal contamination.

¶88

d) The area lies in a tidal, estuarine Godavari delta prone to salinity ingress and inundation, and many farmers have shifted from agriculture to aquaculture for economic reasons.

¶89

e) The Horticulture report attributes the poor health and low yield of the 55 coconut palms in applicants farm primarily to chronic neglect, lack of fertilization and irregular irrigation, while neighbouring coconut gardens under proper management are producing good yield.

¶90

f) On the basis of the available data, the Committee finds that the alleged “total crop loss solely due to surrounding aquaculture farms” is not fully substantiated, and it is not possible to scientifically quantify or apportion specific liability exclusively to nearby aquaculture ponds.

¶91

25. The recommendations contained in the report of the Joint

¶92

Committee are extracted and reproduced below:

¶93

a) District Administration, Irrigation and Agriculture Departments may improve drainage, desilt and regulate Pantabodhi and connected canals to reduce waterlogging and saline ingress, and explore freshwater irrigation support where feasible.

¶94

b) Agriculture Department may prepare a site-specific reclamation plan for the petitioner’s land, including removal of stagnant saline water, soil amelioration (e.g., gypsum, organic manures) and, where viable, introduction of salt-tolerant crops/varieties under suitable schemes.

¶95

c) Horticulture Department may provide technical guidance and support to restore the petitioner’s coconut garden through proper NPK and micronutrient application, regular irrigation, basin management and plant protection measures.

¶96

d) Fisheries Department & APPCB may ensure that all nearby aquaculture ponds are duly registered and

¶97

Page 9 of 13

¶98

operated as per CAA/APSADA and environmental norms, with no discharge or overtopping of pond water into irrigation channels or neighbouring agricultural lands, and carry out periodic joint inspections.

¶99

e) Periodic soil and water quality monitoring may be undertaken in the petitioner's land, Pantabodhi and suitable control fields, and the District Administration may consider a micro-level land use and salinity management plan for Gutteriadevi and surrounding villages to balance agriculture and aquaculture.

¶100

26. The reports filed by the concerned authorities have been perused, and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents have been heard.

¶101

27. Accordingly, we now proceed to examine the allegations, and reliefs sought by the applicant and record our findings as below:

¶102

28. The report of the District Fisheries Officer, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram, dated 13.11.2025, along with G.O. Ms. No. 8, AHDD&F Department, dated 23.02.2018 and the Grama Sabha Resolution records that the lands in the area are prone to inundation and that, in recent years, some farmers have resorted to aquaculture activities.

¶103

29. The Joint Committee has observed that the area forms part of the tidal and estuarine Godavari delta, which is susceptible to salinity ingress and inundation, and that a number of farmers have shifted from agriculture to aquaculture owing to economic considerations. According to the aforesaid report, an extent of 46.19 acres pertaining to 93 freshwater aquaculture farmers and 131.31 acres pertaining to 227 brackish water aquaculture farmers have recently been converted from nonaqua zones to aqua zones. The report further states that such conversion was carried out pursuant to Government Orders and resolutions passed by the Gram Sabha. However, no permission from the Department of Fisheries was obtained for the conversion of these non-aqua lands into aquaculture zones, including the lands adjacent to those of the applicant.

¶104

30. The soil analysis of the applicant’s agricultural land indicates that the soil is dark grey and solid with pH 7.56

¶105

Page 10 of 13

¶106

(neutral to slightly alkaline) and electrical conductivity of 2864 μS/cm (~2.86 dS/m), indicating moderate salinity but not extremely saline conditions. The organic carbon content (2.27%) is relatively good, and the loss on ignition/drying values do not indicate any abnormal accumulation of inorganic or organic contaminants. The Joint Committee has also concluded that the soil analysis of the applicant’s land indicates neutral to slightly alkaline pH and moderate salinity, with no evidence of heavy metal contamination.

¶107

31. Accordingly, the soil conditions do not appear to have adversely affected soil fertility or crop yield, as alleged. However, aquaculture, particularly intensive prawn farming, has the potential to increase soil and water salinity in adjoining agricultural areas, especially where brackish-water aquaculture is carried out in proximity to freshwater agricultural lands and adequate containment and drainage measures are not in place. It is, therefore, necessary to ensure that excessive salinity conditions do not arise in future, which may lead to deterioration of soil fertility and a decline in paddy yield.

¶108

32. Insofar as the applicant's allegation regarding drastic reduction in the yield of paddy and coconut trees due to the operation of these aquaculture farms is concerned, the Horticulture Department has reported its findings based on interactions with the Sarpanch, the applicant's husband, and neighbouring farmers. The Sarpanch and all the neighbouring farmers unanimously stated that their coconut gardens, which are regularly irrigated, manured, and properly maintained through intercultural operations, are in excellent health with good yield.

¶109

33. Sri Francis (husband of the applicant) also reported to have admitted that the garden has remained largely neglected for the last five years without cultural operations. No regular application of recommended doses of fertilizers (NPK+ micronutrients), no soil working, basin management, or pest/disease management practices were carried out. The irrigation was also highly irregular.

¶110

Page 11 of 13

¶111

34. The Joint Committee, based on the report of the Horticulture Department, has concluded that the poor health and low yield of the 55 coconut palms in the applicant's farm are primarily attributable to chronic neglect, inadequate fertilization, and irregular irrigation. Further, on the basis of the available data, the Committee has found that the allegation of a “total crop loss solely due to surrounding aquaculture farms” is not fully substantiated. The Committee has also opined that it is not scientifically possible to quantify or apportion specific liability exclusively to the nearby aquaculture ponds.

¶112

35. Therefore, the applicant's contention that aquaculture activities and the alleged pollution arising therefrom have adversely affected soil fertility and caused a drastic reduction in paddy and coconut yields, as well as the prayer for compensation for the alleged losses suffered on that account, are devoid of merit.

¶113

36. Insofar as the applicant's other prayers relating to ensuring proper irrigation of the fields, drainage of the lands, and restoration of soil fertility are concerned, the Joint Committee has made certain recommendations, as noted in paragraph 27 above. The concerned authorities shall examine the said recommendations and take appropriate follow-up action in accordance with law.

¶114

37. In light of the foregoing discussion and findings, we deem it appropriate to issue the following directions:

¶115

(i) The Fisheries Department and the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) shall ensure that all nearby aquaculture ponds are duly registered and operated following adequate environmental safeguards.

¶116

(ii) Henceforth, conversion of agricultural land to aquaculture use shall be permitted only after

¶117

Page 12 of 13

¶118

registration and required statutory permissions, and ensuring adequate environmental safeguards and appropriate measures for the protection of adjoining agricultural lands.

¶119

(iii) The Fisheries Department and APPCB shall also conduct periodic joint inspections and monitor soil and water quality to ensure that there is no discharge or overtopping of pond water into irrigation channels or adjoining agricultural lands.

¶120

(iv) The District Administration, in coordination with the Irrigation and Agriculture Departments, shall take necessary measures to improve drainage and to desilt and regulate Panta Bodhi and connected canals so as to mitigate waterlogging and salinity ingress, and shall also explore the feasibility of providing freshwater irrigation support.

¶121

(v) The District Administration may consider preparing a micro-level land use and salinity management plan for Guttenadeevi and the surrounding villages, if any, with a view to preventing salinity ingress and environmental degradation, and protecting agriculture lands and water resources.

¶122

38. With the above directions, the Original Application

¶123

[O.A. No.150 of 2025 (SZ)] is disposed of.

¶124

Sd/-

¶125

Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM

¶126

Sd/-

¶127

Dr. Prashant Gargava, EM