APHC010155932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE 17th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 8015/2025 Between: 1. INDUKURI VENKATA RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU, S/O VENKTA LAKSHMI NARASIMHA RAJU AGED 56 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O 3-37, JANAKIRAMARAJU PURAM. NEAR RAMALAYAM, CHINAKAPAVARAM, AKIVEEDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DIST., ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECREATARY, FISHARIES DEPARTMENT, SECREATARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUTNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES, GOVERNMENT OF AP., AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP., 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR / DISTRICT LEVEL IMPLIMENTATION COMMITTEE DLIC, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHIMAVARAM, W.G.DIST., 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, WEST GODAVARI, AT BHIMAVARAM. 5. THE REVEUNE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM, W.G.DISTRICT. 6. THE FISHARIES DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, AKIVEEDU, W.G.DISTRICT. 7. THE THAHSILDHAR, AKIVEEDU MANDAL, AKIVEEDU, W.G.DISTRICT. 8. PATHAPATI SRAVANTHI, W/0 RAMARAJU, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, CHINAKAPAVARAM VILLAGE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, AKIVEEDU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 9. MUPPANENI BHARATH, S/O JANARDHANARAO, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 104, GRK VIRIAY CLASSIC, DR.NO. 7-34/1, CHINAMIRDM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. 10. MUPPANENI KISHORE, S/O JANARDHANARAO, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 104, GRK VINAY CLASSIC, DR.NO. 7-34/1, CHINAMIRAM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue Writ,Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 allowing the un-official respondents to dig the fish ponds in lands in Sy.Nos., 284-2b, 285-1A-2, 285-2A-2, 314-8b-2, 315-2, 314-8a, 314-8b-3, 284-2A, 285-1 A-1, 285-2A-1, 314-8b-1, 315-1 total extent of Ac. 4.00 cents, adjesent to the lands of the petitioners without prior permissions and without following the procedure established any under G.O.M.S.no. 7 Animal Husbandary, Dairy Development Fisheries (Fish) Department, Dated 16-03-2013, without leaving the boundaries as spicified in the G.O is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional violative of principles of natural justice Consequently to direct the respondents to stop the digging the fish ponds in the in Sy.nos., 284-2b, 285-1A-2, 285-2A-2, 314-8b-2, 315-2, 314-8a, 314-8b-3, 284-2A, 285-1A-1 285- 2A-1, 314-8b-1, 315-1 total extent of Ac. 4.00 cents, adjesent to the lands of the petitioners and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents not to dig the fish ponds in the in Sy.nos., 284-2b, 285-1A-2, 285-2A-2, 314-8b-2, 315-2, 314-8a, 314-8b-3, 284-2A, 285-1A-1, 285-2A-1, 314-8b-1, 315-1 total extent of Ac. 4.00 cents, adjesent to the lands of the petitioners pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated: 27.03.2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JAMI MADHAVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR FISHERIES 3. K V L NARASIMHA RAO The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.8015 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the unofficial respondents in restraining respondent Nos.8 to 10 from bringing agricultural lands under cultivation and converting the same into fish ponds in Sy.Nos.284-2B, 285-1A-2, 285-2A-2, 314-8B-2, 315-2, 314-8A, 314-8B-3, 284-2A, 285-1A-1, 285-2A-1, 314-8B-1 & 315-1. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.8 to 10 submits that the competent authority has granted the requisite licence on 15.06.2025 for a new freshwater aquaculture farm. It is submitted that the competent authority has granted the requisite permission for aquaculture cultivation over an extent of three acres of land. The licence granted has also been placed before this Court for reference. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the said licence granted in favour of respondent Nos.8 to 10 is contrary to the provisions of the Act. 4. Be that as it may, in view of the licence issued in favour of respondent Nos.8 to 10, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to take appropriate further steps in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dated 17.09.2026 KGM 4 Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned ☑ Reportable Non-reportable ☑ 5 95 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.8015 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2026 KGM