THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.6891 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is the owner of 69 cents of land in R.S.No.26/1B, 26/1B2 and 26/1B3 of Velivella Village Palakol Mandal, West- Godavari District. The lands of respondents 4 to 6, in Sy.No.26/2A, 26/2B, 27/1A, 27/1B and 27/2, admeasuring Ac.3.64 cents, are in the immediate neighbourhood. Petitioner contends that the respondents 4 to 6 are undertaking aquaculture in their land, and on account of the same, her land got salinated and became unfit for agriculture. She claims to have made several representations to respondents 1 to 3, to prevent respondents 4 to 6 from undertaking aquaculture, contrary to law, and complains that no action has been taken thereon. The 4th respondent filed a counter-affidavit. He admitted the factum of carrying out aquaculture in his land. It is, however, stated that the said activity is being undertaken on the basis of specific permission accorded by the competent authority of the Government of India, vide proceedings dated 24-08-2004. Heard Sri K.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, and Sri Kurti Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6. This Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court have stepped in, to prevent indiscriminate and unauthorised aquaculture, particularly over the lands in coastal districts. The effects of aqua-culture on the environment, as well as surrounding lands, were taken note of. Therefore, directions were issued for constitution of Authority, to regulate such activities. The petitioner is under the impression that respondents 4 to 6 have started aquaculture in their land, without such permission. The 4th respondent has placed before this Court, a copy of the order dated 24-08-2004, issued by the Aquaulture Authority, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. This was followed by an order dated 10-11- 2004, passed by the Assistant Director of Aquaculture. The 4th respondent was accorded permission to carry out aqua- culture for a period of five years. It is said that respondents 5 and 6 have similar permissions. The Parliament enacted the Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act’). Separate machinery is created thereunder. Section 13 of the Act provides for grant, as well as renewal of permissions. The permissions accorded to respondents 4 to 6 are due for renewal. As and when such renewal is under consideration, the petitioner can submit her objection. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to submit her objections at the time of renewal of permission, accorded to respondents 4 to 6. The concerned Authority shall take the objections into account, before any order of renewal is passed in favour of respondents 4 to 6. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.24-04-2009. KO