ORDER :

This writ petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 6 in not allowing the petitioner to draw water from bore well for supplementing the losses from evaporation, seepage, etc., to his aquaculture field situated in Krapa Sankarayyagudem Village, Ainavilli Mandal, East Godavari District, contrary to Clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (Fish.II) Department, dated 16.03.2013, which is being illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Smt. Pulipati Radhika, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Fisheries.

3. The gravamen of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been cultivating aquaculture in the fish tank covered by the land extent Ac.5.10 cents situated in Sy.Nos.62/2, 63/7, 63/7, 62/1, 62/2, 62/2 and 62/1 of Krapa Sankarayyagudem Village, Ainavilli Mandal, East Godavari District. As the income source through the cultivation is meager and not sufficient, he has applied for issuance of permissions before the competent authority for existing aquaculture in the aforesaid land. Considering the existing aquaculture farm, as per G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013 and as amended by G.O.Ms.No.15, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (Fish) Department, dated 26.05.2015, permissions were granted to the petitioner for continuation of existing aquaculture in an extent of Ac.4.08 cents out of total farm area of Ac.5.10 cents in the aforesaid survey numbers by issuing the Certificate of Registration of Existing Fresh Water Aquaculture Farm dated 19.02.2016. He spent huge amounts for maintenance of aquaculture farms and he has been doing aquaculture as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. However, the respondents 3 to 6 are not allowing him to use the bore wells dug in the land, stating that it was contrary to the provisions of WALTA Act, 2002 and Clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. However, he is cultivating the fresh water aquaculture in the fish ponds by drawing water from irrigation canals and drainage channels by paying water cess, but he is drawing the water from the bore wells to replenish the evaporated water in the fish ponds only as per Clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. Moreover, the aqua ponds are being filled only with the fresh water for aquaculture, but to fill with any salt water. Due to water evaporation and shortage of oxygen in the water, he is using bore wells to draw the water once in a week at least 10% of the tank as per Clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013. But, the respondents 3 and 4 arbitrarily and contrary to law are objected the using of bore wells and draw the water in his aquaculture farm by seizing the bore wells, which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Clause 7.15 of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 16.03.2013.

4. This Court, on 04.12.2020, granted interim order in line with the earlier orders passed by this Court that the bore well in the petitioner’s fields should be restored with a strict direction that it shall be used only once in a week for a period of four hours on that day for refreshing the water in the petitioner’s aqua culture fields. It is also directed that the officers of the Fisheries Department should also be present to monitor the usage of the water in that period of four hours only and ensure that the bore well is not used thereafter. The respondents 2 to 5 are therefore directed to permit partial restoration of the bore well usage of that limited purpose. By virtue of the said order, the petitioner is continuing the aquaculture using the bore well water.

5. The 5th respondent – Assistant Inspector of Fisheries filed his counter stating that the agriculture farmers of Krapa Sankarayyagudem Village during the month of November, 2020 submitted a complaint against the unauthorized salt water aquaculture of the petitioner that salt water aquaculture may cause adverse impact on the surrounding agriculture lands, coconut fields and groundwate