HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.15310 of 2014 Date: 05-06-2014 Between:
Dandu Venkata Satyanarayanaraju .. Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Dairy Development & Fisheries, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.15310 of 2014 ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the action on the part of the Fisheries Department officers in not processing and finalizing the application form submitted by the petitioner seeking permission to aquaculture farms admeasuring Ac.81.30 cents in R.S.No.114/1, 2A, 5A 5B, 4B, 2A, 5F, 3C, 4A, 5E, 2B, 3 A, B, 5D, 5C, 115/1,2,3,116/5B, 1A, 3, 5A, 1C, 6, 7, 2A, 117/5, 6, 10, 1, 3, 2, 8, 7, 9, 11, 4, 118/3, 4B4A, 2B, 1C, 1B, 2A, 1A, 1B, 119/3, 2, 1, 120/1, 6, 3, 2, 121/3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 1, 2, 3G, 3F, 123/6,3,4,2,5,1, 112, 105/1B, 108/4A, 110/1, 161/3G,105/1C, 108/1B, 108/1C, 108/1D, 105/4, 105/5, 105/2A, 108/1A, 108/2A, 10812B,109/3 109/2, 105/1A, 108/4B, 108/4C, 108/4B, 108/4C, 108/4D, 108/3, 109/4, 109/1, 105/1B, 105/2B, 105/2C,110/4A,110/4B, 110/6, 110/2, 110/3, 110/5 in Moturu village, Gudiwada Mandal, Krishna District as illegal and unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to the authorities to grant permission for fish tank without any further delay and to direct the respondent not to interfere with the operations of aquaculture farms of the petitioner.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is permanent resident of Moturu village, and agriculturist and that as the lands of the petitioner are low level lands and not fit for cultivation, the petitioner made an application on 09-03-2011 to the respondents for registration and permission for fish tank for which the petitioner paid necessary fee vide D.D.No.225805 dated 09-03- 2011 drawn on State Bank of India, Machilipatnam Branch for registration/permission. Though the petitioner applied for registration, his case is not considered by the respondents. Meanwhile, the respondents are interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. It is also stated that the case of the petitioner is considered and recommended by the Mandal Level Committee and Department of Ground Water, Agriculture, Fisheries Department and A.P. Pollution Control Board, and the same is pending with the 2nd respondent for consideration and no final orders are passed till today. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to carryout repairs and maintenance works as per clause 7.23 of G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 16-03-2013 and the respondents are also directed to dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 09-03- 2011, as it is stated that already necessary recommendations have been made by the 2nd respondent.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition, shall stand closed.
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 05-06-2014 Ksn