IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that statutory remedies must be exhausted before seeking judicial intervention through writ petitions.

ORDER :

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari a)Declaring the actions of the 1st to 11th Respondents in willfully failing to follow the statutory mandate under AP State Aquaculture Development Authority Act and Rules and initiating the Impugned proceedings purely to protect the political interests of the 12th and 13th Respondents as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution; b) Declaring the action of the 5th Respondent in issuing the Notice dated 02.07.2024 and the consequential Notice No. 01/2024 i.e., Notice to the Licensee for seizure and forfeiture of the stock, dated 06.08.2024, to be illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution. c) Consequentially, quash and setaside the Notice dated 02.07.2024 issued by the 5th Respondent and the consequential Notice No. 01/2024 i.e.. Notice to the Licensee for seizure and forfeiture of the stock dt.06.08.2024 issued by the 5th Respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Indian Constitution…”

2. Heard Sri Unnam Akhil Chowdary, learned counsel representing Sri Unnam Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Fisheries; Sri Yelisetti Somaraju, learned Standing Counsel; learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development; learned Government Pleader for Agriculture; and Sri K.S.Murthy, learned designed Senior Counsel; appearing for the respective respondents.

3. On an application made by the respondents 12 and 13 in the writ petition for initiation an action against the petitioner’s aquaculture on the ground to make sure that the brackish water is not introduced into the fresh water pond or reservoir, a show cause notice, dated 02.07.2024 was issued by the fisheries department to the petitioner herein calling for explanation. Following the same, the petitioner herein has submitted his explanation on 09.07.2024. Thereafter, the 5th respondent passed the final orders with the following observation:

“Basing on the above observations and grounds and in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 25(2) of the APSADA Rules, 2020, the seizure and the forfeiture of the stock as mentioned above is hereby implemented in the presence of the Designated Committee Members appointed for the purpose.”

4. Assailing the said order dated 06.08.2024 of the 5th respondent, the fisheries department, the present writ petition is came to be filed on several grounds one such ground is that the petitioner has not followed the procedure as contemplated under the A.P.State Aquaculture Development Authority Act 2020 or Act 29 of 2020, while passing the impugned proceedings.

5. Be that as it may, learned Designated Senior Counsel Sri K.S.Murthy, appearing on behalf of the respondents 12 and 13, would raise the maintainability/entertainability of the writ petition. The learned Senior Counsel contends that under Section 35 of the Act 29 of 2020 with Rule 27 of the A.P. State Aquaculture Development Authority Rules 2020 (For brevity ‘Rules’), the petitioner is provided with an efficacious and alternative remedy by way of an appeal to the appellate authority against the order of the 5th respondent i.e., the Fisheries Development Officer and the petitioner has resorted to invoke the writ jurisdiction unless the order impugned has been delivered/transmitted inviolation of natural justice or the impugned proceedings is wholly without jurisdiction, the writ petition is not maintainable.

6. It is relevant to extract Section 35 of the