A

B

c

D

E

F

S. JAGANNATH

v.

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

DECEMBER 11, 1996

[KULDIP SINGH AND S. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.]

Environment (protection) Act, 1986: Sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 15.

Environment Protection Rules, 1989: Rule 5(3).

Water (Prevention

& Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: Sections 2(j) &

(k) and 25.

Fisheries Act, 1897:

Wild-life Protection Act,

1972 :

Forest conservation Act,

1980:

Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989: Rule 2(j)

and

5.

Environmental /aw-Coastal Zone Regulation Notification-Restric­

tions imposed on prawn fanning

in ecologically fragile

coastal ureas-Writ in

public interest seeking directions for prohibiting prawn famiing in coastal

areas-Held setting up

of shrimp culture fanns within the prohibited area

under Notification cannot be pennitted-Shrimp culture industry held neither

"directly related to water front" nor "directly needing foreshore facilities'-Dis­

tinction between conventional and modem method

of shrimp fanning dis­

cussed-New method poses a serious threat to ecology-In view of damage

caused by acquaculture industry

to ecology the fact of large scale potential of

foreign exchange held not relevant-Directions issued by Supreme

G Court-Constitution of Authority for protection of ecologically fragile coastal

areas-Direction

to recover compensation from

polluter;--Constitution of

Environment Protection Fund-Compensation to workers retrenched from

shrimp culture industries.

Environmental Law-Marine pollution-Sea coast and

H beaches--Degrading environment of-Duty to

protecr-f'recautionary prin-

848

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. 849

ciple and polluter pays principle-Implementation of A

Environmental Law-Sustainable development.

Constitution of India, 1950 :

Articles 48-A and 51-A-Protection and improvement of environ-B

ment:--Duty of State-Negligence on the part of authorities responsible for

implementation of provisions-Deprecation of

Article 25~Seventh Schedule-List I Entry l~oastal Zone Regula-

tion notification issued under Central Act-Held would prevail over the law C

made by legislatures of States.

In exercise of its power under clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of

the Environment Protection Rules, 1986, Ministry of Environment and

Forests, Government of India issued Coastal Zone Regulation Notification

dated February

19, 1991, whereunder various restrictions were imposed on D

prawn farming in the ecologically fragile coastal areas. The Chairman,

Gram

Swaraj Movement, a voluntary organisation working for the uplift­

ment of the weaker sections of Society, filed a writ petition in public

interest under Article

32 of the Constitution seeking directions from this

Court for

(i) stoppage of intensive and semi-intensive type of prawn E

farming in the ecologically fragile coastal areas' (ii) prohibition from nsing

the waste lands/wet lands for prawn farming and

(iii) constitution of a

·national coastal management authority to safeguard the marine life and

coastal areas.

Various States and Union Territories filed their replies to the writ

petitions. Pursuant to an order passed by this Court the National Environ·

mental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur (NEER!) visited coastal

areas of various States to investigate whether the ecologically fragile area

F

was being environmentally degraded and submitted its two reports to this

Court. The Court further directed all the States and Union Territories not G

to give fresh licences or permission for setting up of any acqua-farm in

their respective territories till further orders. With a

view to affording

opportnnity of hearing to acqua-farms this Court also directed the

Coastal

States and Union Territories to issue notices to them. The report

submitted

by Dr. K. Alagarswamy, Director, Central Institute of Brackish

water acqua-culture

was also placed on record. This report highlights H

850 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A various environmental and social problems created by coastal acqua-cul­

ture. It also discussed various types of technologies adopted by the acqna·

culture industries in India.

On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that (1) the modern •

other than traditional • techniques of shrimp farming are highly polluting

B and are detrimental to the coastal environment and marine ecology. There­

fore, only the traditional and improved traditional systems of shrimp

farming

which are environmentally friendly should be permitted; (ii),

setting up of shrimp farms

on the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries,

creeks, rivers and backwaters upto

500 meters from the High Tide Line

C (HTL) and the line between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL is

totally prohibited under para 2 of the Coastal Zone Regulation notifica­

tion; (iii) the shrimp culture industry is neither "directly related to water

front" nor "directly needing foreshore facility" and as such is a prohibited

activity under Para 2(1) of the Coastal Zone Regulation Notification; and

D

E

F

(iv) the shrimp culture farms are discharging highly polluting effiuent

which is

"hazardous waste" without obtaining authorisation from the State

Pollution Control Board under Hazardous Waste (Management and Han·

dling) Rules, 1989.

On behalf of shrimp acqua-culture industry it was contended that

(i) a. shrimp farm is an industry which is directly related to water front

and cannot exist witliout fore-shore facilities;

(ii) certain provisions of the

coastal acqua-culture legislations enacted

by various

States are not in

consonance with the Coastal Zone Regulation notification issued

by the

Government of India under

Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection)

Act; and (iii) almost 100 percent of the produce is exported and as sncb

the industry bas a large potential to earn foreigl/ exchange.

Allowing the petition with costs, this Court

HELD : I. The purpose or the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ)

Notification is to protect the ecological fragile coastal areas and

to

G safeguard the aesthetic qualities and uses of the sea coast. The setting up

of modern shrimp acqua-culture farms right

on the sea coast and

con·

struction of ponds and other infrastructure thereon is per se hazardous

and is bound

to degrade the marine ecology, coastal environment and the

aesthetic uses of the sea coast. The setting up of shrimp culture farms

H within the prohibited area under the CRZ Notification cannot be

per·

,

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. 851

milted. (876-C-E) A

2. Para 2 (viii) of the CRZ Notification prohibits the bunding or

disturbing the natural course

of sea water with similar constructions. A

bond is an embankment

or dyke. A shrimp farm on the coastal area by

itself operates as a dyke of a pond as it leaves no area from draining of

the

flood waters. The construction of the shrimp farms, therefore, violates B

clause (viii) of para 2 of CRZ Notification. (876-F-H]

3. An industry dependent on sea water cannot by itself is an industry

"directly related to water front" or "directly needing fore-shore facilities'.

The shrimp culture industry, therefore, cannot

be permitted to be set op C

anywhere in the coastal regulation zone under the CRZ Notification.

(877-E-F)

4. That part of the shore which remains covered with water at the

High Tide and gets uncovered and

become visible at the Low Tide is called

'foreshore'.

It is not

p9ssible to set a shrimp culture farm in the said area D

because it would completely submerge in water at the High Tide. It is,

therefore, obvious that foreshore facilities are neither directly nor indirect-

ly needed in the setting up of shrimp farm.

So far as 'water front' is

concerned it is

no doubt correct that a shrimp farm may have some

relation

to the water front in the sense that the farm is dependent on E

brackish water which can be drawn from the sea. But shrimp cultnre

farming has

no relation or connection with the 'water front' thongh it bas

relation

with brackish water which is available from various water-bodies

including sea. What is required is the

"brackish water' and not the 'water

front'.

The material on record shows that the shrimp ponds constructed

by the farms draw water from the sea by pipes, jerries etc. It is not the

'water front'

which is needed by the industry. What is reqnired is the

brackish water

which can be drawn from any source including sea and

carried to any distance

by pipes etc. Therefore, the

shrimJ! cnltnre indnstry

is neither 'directly related

to water front' nor

"directly needing foreshore

facilities'.

[875-H; 876-A-C; 877-D)

5. The environmental impact of shrimp culture essentially depends on

the mode of culture adopted. There is a vast difference between the

tradi­

tional methods and the new commercialised system. The traditional ac­

quaculture, including shrimp, is unusually small-scale, using low inputs

F

G

and relies on natural tidal action for water exchange. It has no adverse H

852 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A effect on the environment and ecology. The modern method, on the other

hand, is larger in scale

and intensive or semi-intensive in nature. It is owned

and operated

by commercial and often

foreign· owned companies which

mainly export the shrimp. In intensive acquaculture, selected species are

bred using a dense stocking rate. To maintain the very crowded shrimp

B population and attain higher production efficiency, artificial feed, chemical

additives

and antibiotics are used. The new trend of more intensified

shrimp framing in certain parts of the country

·without much control of

feeds, seeds

and other inputs and water management practices

• has

brought to the fore a serious threat to environment and ecology. Thus

traditional and improved traditional types of shrimp farm technologies are

C environmentally benign and pollution free.

Other types of technologies •

extensive, modified extensive, semi intensive and intensive. create pollution

and have degrading effect

on the environment and coastal ecology.

Such

types of shrimp farms cannot be permitted to operate.

(858-H; 865-E-G; 858-H; 859-A; 924-C,D]

D 6. Sea coast and beaches are a gift of the nature to the mankind. The

aesthetic qualities and recreational utility of the said area has to

be

maintained. Any activity which has the

effect of degrading the environtnent

cannot be permitted. Mangrove forests constitute an important component

of coastal eco·system. They thri7e in tidle estuaries, salt marshes and

E muddy coast lines. Conversion of mangrove to shrimp farms significantly

reduces the natural production of wild capture shrimp as

well as other

fisheries.

[877·F·G; 920-A]

7. Alagarswamy report highlights various environmental and social

problems created

by the Coastal Acquaculture. It is an authentic document

F relating to the functioning of shrimp culture industry in India. This report

highlights drinking water problem, salinisation and destruction of

mangrove

by the shrimp culture industry. The increase of stocking

den·

sities, heavy inputs of high energy feeds, use of drugs and chemicals result

in the discharge of highly polluted effiuent into the sea, creeks etc.

and on

G the sea coast by the shrimp farms. It is, therefore, not possible to accede

to the contention

that commercial shrimp farming has no adverse affect

on environment

and coastal ecology. (878-A-B]

8. Two reports submitted by NEERI clearly indicate that due to

commercial acqua-culture farming, there is considerable degradation of

H the mangrove eco-systems, depletion of Casurina plantations, pollution of

-

)

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. 853

potable waters, reduction in fish catch, and blockage of direct approach to A

the sea-shore. Agriculture lands and salt farms are being converted into

commercial acqua-culture farms. The ground water has got contaminated

due to seepage

of impounded water from the acqua-culture farms. Highly

polluted

effluents are discharged by the shrimp farms into the Sea and on

the sea-coast. [906-B-D)

9. Expert Committee Report on 'Impact of Shrimp Farms along the

Coast of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry"· (Suresh Committee) has also high­

lighted the impact of shrimp culture farming in various field viz. effiuent

pollution; salinisation; feed and wastes; fertilizers and therapeutants; loss

B

of mangroves and biodiversity; in pact on agriculture and denial of potable C

water. [906-D-G]

10. The United Nations Report entitled 'Some Ecological and Social

implications of Commercial Shrimp Farming in Asia' too gives the dismal

picture regarding polluted waters

and depleted fisheries; and natnral

resonrce degradation as a result of shrimp farming.

(920-D-F] D

11. All the reports clearly indicate that the expansion of modern

shrimp ponds in the coastal areas has meant that local fishermen could

only reach the breach

by trespassing at great risk on shrimp farms or by

taking a long detour. Local people have not only lost access to their fishing E

grounds and to their sources of riverine seafoods and seaweeds, but they

also have

to relinquish social and recreational activities traditionally

taking place

on the beaches. However, the right of the fishermen and

farmers living in the coastal areas to take their living by way of fishing and

farming cannot be denied to them. (921-E-G; 932-G)

F

12.

On the basis of the assessment of socio-economic status of

acquaculture in a systematic manner the NEERI has concluded in its

Report that the damage caused to ecology

and economics by the

acquacul­

ture farming is higher than the earnings from the sale of coastal acquacul­

ture produce. TI1e farm-raised production of shrimp is much lesser than G

the wild-caught production. Even if some of the shrimp culture farms

which are polluting the environment, are closed the production of shrimp

by environmentally friendly techniques would not be affected and there

may not

be any loss to the economy specially in view of the finding that the

damage caused to ecology

and economics by the acquaculture farming is H

854 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A higher than the earnings from the sale of coastal acquaculture produce.

While the production increases and export earnings of the industry are

well publicised, the socio-economic losses and environmental degradation

affecting the well-being of coastal population are hardly noticed.

(883-B-C; 933-G-H; 919-E]

B 13. Constitutional provisions contained in Articles 48-A and 51-A as

well as other statutory provisions mandate the State to protect and

im­

prove the environment. Legislations like Fisheries Act, 1897, Wild Life

Protection Act, 1972 and Forests Conservation Act, 1980 contain useful

provisions for environment protection and pollution control. Unfortunate-

C ly, the authorities responsible for the implementation of various statutory

provisions are

wholly re-miss in the performance of their duties under the

said provisions.

(928-D-E]

14.

Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act provides punish­

ment for contravention of the provisions of the said Act. The effiuents

D discharged by the commercial shrimp culture farms are covered by the

definition of Environmental pollutant, environmental pollution

and

haz­

ardous substance. The effiuents discharged by the farms at various places

were in

excess of the the prescribed standards. Unfortunately, no action is

being taken

by the authorities under the Act. (926-B-D]

E

F

15. There is nothing on the record to show that the shrimp culture,

owners are

even conscious of the statutory provisions which requires them

to obtain the necessary consent/authorisation from the concerned

Pollu­

tion Control Board under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and

Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. (928-C-D]

16. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 has been enacted by

Parliament under Entry 13 of List I Schedule VII read with Article 253 of

the Constitution of India. The CRZ Notification having been issued under

the Act shall have overriding effect and shall prevail over the Law made

G by the

legislati;res of the States. (929-A-B)

Ve/lore Citizens Welfare Fornm v. Union of India & Ors., JT (1996) 7

SC 375, referred to. "

Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, JT (1996) 2

H 196, cited.

>

S.JAGANNA1H V. U.0.1. 855

DIRECTIONS : A

(a) The Central Government shall constitute an authority before

January

15, 1997 under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act,

1986 and shall confer on the said authority all the powers necessary to

protect the ecologically fragile coastal areas, sea shore, water front

and

other coastal areas and specially to deal with the situation created by the B

shrimp culture industry and the coastal States,

Union Territories. The

authority shall

be headed by a retired Judge of a High Court.

Other mem­

bers shall be appointed preferably with expertise in the field of acquacul­

ture, pollution control and environment protection. The Central

Government shall confer on the said authority the power to issue directions C

under section 5 of the Act and for taking measures with respect to the

matiers referred to in clauses (v), (vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x) and (xii) of sub­

section (2) of Section 3.

(b) The authority so constituted by the Central Government shall

implement "the Precautionary Principle" and "the Polluter Pays" Principles. D

(c) The Shrimp culture industry/the shrimp ponds are covered by the

prohibition contained in para 2(1) of the CRZ Notification. No shrimp

culture ponds can

be constructed or set up within the coastal regulation

zone as defined in the CRZ Notification. This shall

be

applicable to all seas,

bays, esturies, creeks, rivers

and backwaters. This direction shall not

apply E

to traditional and improve traditional types of technologies which are

practised in the coastal low lying areas.

(d) All acquaculture industries/shrimp culture industries/shrimp

culture ponds operatinwset up in the coastal regulation zone as defined

under the CRZ Notification shall

be demolished and removed from the said

area before March 31, 1997. A compliance report in this respect shall

be

filed in this Court before April 15, 1997.

F

(e) The farmers who are operating traditional and improved tradi­

tional system of acquaculture may adopt improved technology for in- G

creased production productivity and return with prior approval of the

"authority" constituted

by this order.

(I) The agricultural lands, salt pan lands, mangroves, wet lands, forest

lands, land

for village common purpose and the land meant for

public pur­

poses shall not be used converted for construction of shrimp culture ponds. H

856 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A' (g) No acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp cul-

B

ture ponds shall be constructed/set up within 1000 meter of Chilka lake

and Pullicat lake (including Bird Sanctuaries namely Yadurapattue and

Ndapattu). . . ·

(h) Acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture

ponds already operating

and functioning in the said area of

1000 meter

shall be closed and demolished before 31, 1997. A compliance report in

this respect shall be filed in this Court by the authorities before April 15,

1997.

C (i) Acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture

ponds other than traditional and improved traditional may he set up/con­

, structcd outside the coastal , regulation zone as defined by the CRz

notification and outside 1000 meter of Chilka and Pulicat lakes with the

prior approval of the "authority" as constituted by this Court. Such in-

. dustries which are alre'i.dy o'perating, in the said ar~a~ shall obtain

D 'authorisation from the "Authority" before April 30, 1997 failing which the

Industry concerned shall stop functioning with effei:t from the said date.

Any acquacnlture activity including intensive and semi-Intensive which has

the effect_ of causing salinity of soil, or the drinking waier or wells and/or ·

by the nse of chemical reeds increases shrimp or prawn production with,

E , consequent increase in sedimentation which, on put-refraction is a poten­

tial health hazard, apart from causing situation turbidity of water courses

and estuaries with detrimental ;;;,plication on local fauna and flora shall

not be allowed by the aforesaid Authority •

•• • > .•· ~- ',,

. (j) Acquaculture industry/shrimp, culture industry/shrimp culture,

ponds which have been functionin~operating within the coastal regulation

zone

as defined by the CRZ .Notification and within

1000 meter from

Chilka

and Pulikat lakes shall be liable to compensate the affected person

on the basis of the 'polluter pays' principle

•

. , .;

(k) The authority shall, with the help of expert opinion and after

G giving opportunity to the concerned polluters assess the loss to the ecol·

ogy/environment , in the affected .. areas and. shall· also identify the in·

dividuals/families who have suffered because of the pollution and shall

assess the compensation to be

paid to the said individuals/families. The

authority shall further determine the compensation to be

recovered from

H ' the poll'!ters as cost of reversing the damaged environment. The authority

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.O.L 857

shall lay down just and fair procedure for completing the exercise. A

(I) The authority shall compute the c_ompensation under two heads

namely, for reversing the ecology and for payment to individuals. A state­

ment showing the amount recovered from each polluter, the persons to

whom the compensation is to be payable shall be forwarded to the Collec­

tor/District Magistrate of the area concerned.

(m) Violation or non-compliance of the directions of this Court shall

attract the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act.

B

(n) The compensation recovered from the polluters shall be

deposited under a separate head called 'Environment Protection Fund' C

and shall be ntilised for compensating the affected persons as identified

by the authority and also for restoring the damaged environment.

(

o) The authority,

shall frame schemes for reversing the damage

caused to the

ecology and environment by pollutions. The schemes so D

framed shall be execnted by the respective State Governments/Union

Ter­

ritory Government under the supervision of the Central Government.

(p) The workmen employed in the shrimp cultnre industries which

are to

be closed in terms of this order, shall be deemed to have been

retrenched with effect from April,

30, 1997 provided they have been in E

continnous service for not less than one year in the industry concerned

before the said date. Accordingly, they shall be paid compensation as well

as six years' wages as additional compensation. The gratuity amonnt

payable to the workmen shall

be paid in addition.

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition

(C) No. 561 of

1994.

Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

F

D.P. Gupta, Solicitor General, V.R. Reddy, Altaf Ahmad, Additional

Solicitor Generals,

Ms. Indira Jai Singh,

P.P. Malhotra, Kapil Sibal, H.N. G

Salve, Tapas Ray, Shiva Subramaniam, G.L. Sanghi, N. Santosh Hegde,

Jayant Das, V.N. Ganpule, Bhim Rao Naik, M.C. Mehta, Ms. Seerua

Midha, K.R.R. Pillai, Sanjay Parikh, Ms. Anita Shenoy, Vijay· Panjwani,

Krishan Mahajan, Ms. Anil Katiyar, K.R. Nagaraja, K.K. Lahiri, Brij K.

Mishra, Ejaz Maqbool, V.B. Nadkarni, S.K. Mehta, Dhruv Mehta, Fazlin H

858 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R ..

>A Anam, H.K. Puri, Rajesh Srivastava, S.P. Lenka, Dilip Sinha, J.R. Das,

A.K. Mylsamy, V. Balachandran, K.R. Nambiar, M. Krishanappan, Avijit

Bhattacharjee, K.

Ram Kumar, Ms. Asha Nair, C. Balasubramaniam,

Asbok Bhan, B.K. Prasad, R.P. Srivastava, K.K. Mani, S. Srinivasan, C.

Srinivasan, (Mrs: A K. Verma and P.O. Tyagi) Adv. for M/s JBD & Co.,

B P.K. Manohar, Vivek Gambhir, Anil Kumar, S.M. Jadhav, D.M. Nargolkar,

C.S. Vaidyanathan, A Mariarputharn, Ajay Kapur, Mrs. Arona Mathur,

P.P. Singh, A. Subba Rao, D.S. Murthy,_ A.D.N. Rao, M.T. George, V.

Krishnamurthy, B. Kanta Rao, Ms. Rekha Pandey, Ms. H. Wahi, E.M.S.

Anam, M.P. Vmod, S.V. Deshpandey, K.L. Taneja, P. Mahale, Rajesh,

Shantha Kumar,

lnderjeet Roy, Raj Kumar Mehta, A.N.S. Nadkarni, Dhruv

. C

Mehta,· A.M. Khanwilkar, D.N. Mishra, Umesh Bhagwat, G.B. Sathe,

Vmod Bhagat, MA Krishnamoorthy and C. V.S. Rao for the appearing

parties.

D

.E

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

KULDIP SINGH, J. Shrimp (Prawn) Culture Industry is taking roots

in India. Since long

the fishermen in India have been

following the tradi­

tional rice/shrimp rotating acqua culture systelll. Rice is grown during part

of the year and shrimp and other fish species are cultured during the rest

of the year. However, during the last decade the traditional system which,

apart from producing rice, produced 140 kgs. of shrimp per hectare of land

began

to' give way to more intensive methods of shrimp culture

which

could produce thousands of kilograms per hectare. A large number of

private companies and multi-national corporations have started investing

in shrimp farms. In the last few years more than eighty thousand hectares ·

F of land have been converted to shrimp farming. India's Marine export

weighed

in at

70,000 tonnes in 1993 and these exports are projected to

reach 200 thousand tonnes by the year 2000. The shrimp farming advocates

regard acquaculture as potential savior of developing countries because it

is a short-duration crop

that provides a high investment return and enjoys

G

an expanding market. The said expectation is sought to be achieved by

replacing the environmentally benign traditional mode

of culture by

semi­

intensive and intensive methods. More and more areas are being brought

under semi-intensive

and intensive modes of

shrimp farming. The environ­

mental impact of shrimp culture essentially depends of the mode of culture

_, adopted in the shrimp farming. Indeed, the new trend of more intensified

..

H shrimp farming in certain parts of the country -without much control of

S.JAGANNATH v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 859

feeds, seeds and other inputs and water management practices has A

brought to the fore a serious threat to the environment and ecology which

has been highlighted before

us.

B

This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India -in public

interest -has been filed

by

S. Jagannathan, Chairman, Gram Swaraj Move­

ment, a voluntary organisation working for the upliftment of the weaker

section of society. The petitioner has sought the enforcement of Coastal

Zone Regulation Notification dated February

19, 1991 issued by the

Government of India, stoppage of intensive and semi-intensive type of

prawn farming in the ecologically fragile coastal areas, prohibition from

using the waste lands/wet lands for Prawn farming and the constitution of

C

a National Coastal Management Authority to safeguard the marine life and

coastal areas. Various other prayers have been made in the writ petition.

This Court issued notice

by the order dated October 3, 1994.

On December

12, 1994, this Court passed the following order :-

"Ministry of Environment r.nd Forests, Govt. of India issued a

Notification dated February

19, 1991, under Clause (d) of Sub-rule

(3)of Rule

5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 wherein

·15

it was declared that the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries,

creeks, rivers and backwater which are influenced by the tidal

action (in the landward side) upto 500 metres from the High Tide E

Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and

the HTL are Coastal Regulation zone. The Central Govt. has

imposed various restrictions in the said Notification. Mr. Mehta,

learned advocate appearing for the petitioners states that despite

the issue of the Notification unauthorised industries and other

F

construction is being permitted by various States within the area

which has been declared

as Coastal Regulation Zone. . .......... .

Meanwhile

we direct all the respondent

States not to permit the

setting up of any Industry or the construction of any type on the

area at least upto 500 metres from the sea water at the maximum

High Tide. The above said area i.e. from the High Tide Level upto

G 500 metres shall be kept free from all construction of any type".

The Union of India and States/Union Territories of Gujarat, Maharashtra,

Orissa, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Goa, Pondicherry, Darnan/Deu,

Andaman/Nicobar and Lakshdeep have filed replies to the writ petitions.

H

860 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A This Court on March 27, 1995 passed the following order :-

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

"This Public Interest petition is directed against the setting up of

Prawn farms on the coastal area' of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu

and other coastal States. It is alleged that the coastal States are

allowing big business houses to develop prawn farms on a large

scale

in the Ecologically fragile coastal areas of the

States con­

cerned in the violation of Environment Protection Act, 1986 and

the rules framed thereunder and various other provisions of law.

It is also alleged that establishment of prawn farms on rural

cultivable lands

is creating serious environmental, social and

economic problems for the rural people living along with the

coastal bed specially in the east coast... .... Meanwhile, we direct

NEER!, Nagpur through its Director to appoint an investigating

team to visit the coastal areas of the

States of Andhra Pradesh and

Tamil Nadu and

give its report to this Court regarding the various

farms which are being set up

in the said area.

In case the investigating team finds that the ecologically fragile

area

is being environmentally degraded then it shall suggest the

remedial measures in that respect. The NEER! team shall keep in

view the Notification dated February 19, 1991 of the Ministry of

Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, issued under the En­

vironment

Protection Act, 1986 and also the provision of the Tamil

Nadu Agriculture (Regulation) Act,

1995. The NEER! shall submit

its report before April

30, 1995".

Pursuant to the above quoted order, the National Environmental Engineer­

ing Research Institute, Nagpur (NEER!) submitted its report dated April

25, 1995 before this Court. This Court further directed NEER! to send an

expert team to the coastal areas in other

States and file its report within

two months, the report was filed in this Court within the specified time.

This Court on May

9, 1995 passed the following order :-

"This matter be listed for final hearing on 4th August, 1995.

Meanwhile we direct that no part of agricultural lands and salt

farw be converted into commercial aquaculture farms hereinafter.

We further direct that no ground water withdrawal,

be allowed for

aquaculture purposes to

any of the industries whether already

existing or in the

process of being set up. No further shrimp farms

-

"

.

.... ·. ·.

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 861

or any acquaculture farms be permitted to be set up in the areas A

in dispute hereinafter.

We direct the respective State Governments (the C '!.:\or

concerned or any other Officer appointed by the Governm1 to

provide free access through acquaculture units to the sea c. ·o

the fishermen/tourists after hearing the parties concerned.

Mr. Mehta has contended that due to these farms

occ1

the most of the coastal areas it has become difficult for the

vill..~-.o

to search for fresh water, the State Govt may examine this aspect

and provide water

by way of tankers wherever it is necessary.

So far as the farmers in the State of Tamil Nadu are concerned

they are all represented through Mr. Kapil Sibal and his team. We

direct the State of AP. to send a copy or the order of this Court

to all the acquaculture farms in the State of AP. informing them

B

c

that the matter shall be taken up by this Court for final hearing on D

4th August,

1995. This may be done by the

State of AP. by the

end of June,

1995.

We direct the Pondicherry Administration to send a copy of

the order of this Court to all the aquaculture farms in Pondicherry

informing them that the matter shall be taken up

by this Court for

final hearing on 4th August, 1995. This may be done by the

Pondicherry Admn.

by the end of June 1995.

We further direct the Superintendent

c.f Police and the Collec­

tor of the areas concerned to see that the order of this Court

specially the directions given are meticulously complied with by all

the farms."

Before finally hearing this matter, this Court passed the following order on

August

24, 1995 :-

I

E

F

"We are of the view that it would be in the interest of justice to G

have full representation before us so far individual aqua-farms in

various States/Union Territories are concerned. We, therefore,

adjourn the hearing to October 17, 1995. Meanwhile, we direct the

coastal States/Union Territory Governments, through their learned

counsel

who are present in the Court, to issue individual notices H

A

B

c

D

862 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

to all the aqua-farms which are located in their respective ter­

ritories.

It may be stated in the notices that the same are being

issued under the direction of

this Court. It should also be specifi­

cally mentioned that

if they want to be heard in these matters by

this Court, they be present through their counseVrepresentatives

in the Court, on the next date of hearing, which

is October 17,

1995. We also direct the Marine Products Export Development

Authority (MPEDA), through its counsel Mr. Harish

N.

Salve, to

do the same exercise at its level also. Apart from that,

we further

direct all the

State Governments/Union Territories to issue public

notices in this respect in daily newspapers which have circulation

in the coastal areas, informing the aqua-farms regarding the hear­

ing of these matters in this Court, on October 17, 1995. This may

be done on two consecutive days.

Notices and publication be completed within 3 weeks from

today. Meanwhile,

we direct all the

State Governments/Union

Territories not to

give fresh licences/permission for setting up/es­

tablishment of any aqua-farm in their respective Territories till

further

orders."

Coastal Pollution, universally, is an emerging problem. So far as India

E is concerned it has already become a serious environmental problem.

Besides direct dumping of waste materials in the seas discharge through

marine outfalls, large volumes of untreated or semi-treated wastes

generated in various land-based sources/activities ultimately find

way to the

seas. The coastal waters directly receive the inland waters,

by way of

F surface run-off and land-drainage, ladden with myriad of refuse materials

-the rejects of wastes of the civilisation. Apart from inputs from rivers and

effluent-outfalls, the coastal areas are subject to intensive fishing, naviga­

tional activities, recreations, ports, industrial discharge and harbours which

are causative factors of water quality degradation to varying degrees.

Contrary

to the open sea, the changes in the quality of coastal waters, are

G much greater due to river discharges under tidal conditions.

With noticeable increase in marine

polb,1tion and the consequential

decline in marine resources, serious concern

was expressed in the

United

Nations' Conference on Human Environments in Stockhohn (1972) attract­

H ing global attention towards the urgent need of identifying the critically

;

S.JAGANNATif v. U.0.1. (KULDIPSINGH,J.] 863

polluted areas of the marine environments, specially in coastal waters, for A

urgent remedial actions. The Conference unanimously resolved that the

littoral States should take early action at their National level for assessment

and control of marine pollution from all sources and carry out systematic.

monitoring to ascertain the efficacy of the pollution regulatory actions

taken

by them. In the background of the Stockholm Conference and in view B

of 1982 Convention on the

"Law of the Sea" defining jurisdiction of ter­

ritorial waters, a model comprehensive Action Plan has been evolved under

the United Nations' Environment Programme (UNEP). Keeping with the

international commitments and in greater National interest, the Govern­

ment of India and the Governments of the coastal States are under a legal

obligation to control marine pollution and protect the coastal-environ-

C

ments.

According to the facts placed on record by the Central Pollution

Control Board (the Board, the coastline of India's mainland

is about

6000

km long. Out of the total landmass of about 3.28 million sq. kms nearly D

0.15 million sq. kms of coastal land-belt (considering 25 km landward

distance) girdles three sides of the country's sea front which in turn

underlays about 0.13 million sq. km sea-bed upto the territorial limit. The

country being riverine, has

14 major, 44 medium and 55 minor rivers which

discharge annually about

1566 thousand million cubic meters of water E

through land drainage into the seas transporting a wide range of pollutants

generated

by land-based activities. Nine out of fourteen major rivers meet

the sea in the east coast (Brahmaputra through Bangladesh) and the

remaining

five in the west coast (Indus through Pakistan).

Besides land drainage, there are large number

of marine coastal

outfalls discharging directly or indirectly industrial and municipal effluents

F

into the seas. Uncontrolled disposal of land-based waste into the seas,

through rivers and effluent outfalls,

is a major cause of pollution of coastal

waters. There are nine coastal States and one

Union Territory (UT) in G

India namely, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu,

Pondicherry (UT), Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal. More than

one-fourth of the total population of the country

is settled in the coastal

areas. The Board in its report regarding "Pollution Potential of Industries

in Coastal Areas of India' dated November,

1995 gives the following data

regarding aquaculture farms : H

864

A

B

I

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

"The effluent generation from aquaculture farms in the east coast

only, in absence of data on west coast farms,

is to the tune of 2.37

million cubic meters per day, out of which Andhra

Pradesh has

the lion share of about

2.12 million cubic meters per day .... It may

be noted that in all the

States, in most cases, the effluent discharge

is indirect (through estuaries, creeks, canals, harbours). It may also

be noteworthy that the effluents from aquaculture farms are dis­

charged directly/indirectly into the coastal waters practically

without any treatment. For disposal of solid waste, on the other

hand, open dumping and land filling

is a common

practice."

C In marine pollution control utmost importance has to be given to the

beaches. The beaches and other areas of special interest are to

be

main­

tained aesthetically and at permissible levels of energetic bacteria. Protec­

tion of ecologically sensitive areas and land used interface resource areas

is equally important. The Central Board for the Prevention and Control of

D Water Pollution (Central Board) in its report "coastal pollution control

series COPOCS/l/1982" recommended as under :-

E

F

G

" -the mangrove forest at Pichavaram, the bird sanctuary and forest

areas at Point Calimere and Coral reef at Mandapam are ecologi­

cally sensitive areas warranting special watch and preservation.

-recreational coastal portions of some sectors of the stretch under

investigation such

as Marine and Elliot beaches at Madras,

Mahabalipurarn,

Pondicherry beach at Pondicherry and. Poom­

puhar at the confluence of the river Cauvery with the sea are to

be maintained at appropriate quality level.

-Continuous monitoring of the coastal waters especially heavy

metals and pesticides in the biota should

be carried out to detect

possible biomagnification of some toxic chemicals and to provide

early

warning."

The Central Board in its report "Coastal Pollution Control Series

COPOCS/5/1986-81'' sought protection of the ecologically fragile areas in

the following term• :-

"The mangrove forest and the wildlife sanctuary in Coringa Island,

H the Pulicat lake and the bird sanctuary at Nelapattu are the

r:

S.JAGANNATH v. U.O.l. (KULDIPSINGH,J.] 865

ecologically sensitive areas warranting special attention and A

protection. No industrial activity which may pose a danger to the

ecosystem in these areas should be permitted.

At Pulicat Lake Area, Machilipatnam, Naupada and lchapuram,

salt pan irrigation

is

pracfoed. No water polluting industry should

be allowed nearby.

The domestic sewage and the industrial effluents entering the

Kolleru Lake through various drains be properly treated so that

no pollutants enter the coastal waters through Upputeru drain".

Shrimps are basically marine. Shrimps are also called Prawns. In

commercial jargon, marine prawns are referred to as shrimps and fresh­

water ones

as prawns.

Prawns and shrimps are invertebrates and are

decaped crustaceans. Sea is their home and they grow by adulthood and

breed in the sea. The progeny start their life

by drifting into estuaries and

B

c

such other brackishwater areas for feeding. In about

4-6 months the larvae D ·

grow into adolescence and go back to their real home of birth, the sea.

Aquaculture has been practised for many centuries

by small farmers

and fisherfolk in Asia to improve their

living conditions. However, there is

a vast difference between the traditional methods and the new commer-

E

cialised system. The traditional aquaculture, including shrimp, is usually

small-scale, using low inputs and relies on natural tidal action for water­

exchange. In some countries, such

as India, Bangladesh and Thailand, there

is a tradition of rice/shrimp rotating, with rice grown part of the year and

shrimp and other fish species cultured the rest of the year. Chemicals,

antibiotics and processed feeds are not used in the traditional method. In

F

this low-yield, natural method, the harvest is small but sustainable over long

periods.

It has no adverse affect on the environment and ecology. The

modern method, on the other hand,

is larger in scale and intensive or

semi-intensive in nature.

It is owned and operated by commercial and often

foreign-owned companies which mainly export the shrimp. In intensive G

aquaculture, selected species are bred using a dense stocking rate. To

maintain the very crowded shrimp population and attain higher production

efficiency, artificial feed, chemical additives and antibiotics are used.

The Food and Agriculture Organisation

(PAO) -an organ of United

Nations Organisation (UNO) -published a report in April, 1995 on a H

866 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A Regional Study and workshop on the Environmental Assessment and

Management of Aquaculture Development. Copy of the report has been

placed on record by Mr. Santosh Hegde learned counsel for the State of

Karnataka. India

was one of the 16 countries participated in the workshop.

Dr.

K. Alagarswami, Director, Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquacul-

B

ture, Madras presented a paper titled

"the current status of aquaculture in

India, the present phase of development and future growth potential",

(hereinafter called Alagarswami report). it has been published as an An­

nexure to the workshop-report published by the FAQ. Para 5.1.2 of

Alagarswami report

gives various types of technologies adopted by the

aquaculture industry

in India. It would be useful to reproduce the same

C hereunder :

D

E

F

G

"5.1.2 Types of technology -changes in technology with time.

Traditional: Practised in West Bengal Kerala, Karnataka and Goa,

also adopted in some areas of Orissa, Coastal low-living areas with

tidal effects along estuaries, creeks and canals; impoundments of

vast areas ranging from 2-200 ha in size, characteristics : fully

tidally-fed; salinity variations according to monsoon regime; seed

resource of mixed species from the adjoining creeks and canals by

auto-stocking; dependent on natural food; water intake and

drain­

ing managed through sluice gates depending on local tidal effect;

no feeding; periodic harvesting during full and new moon periods;

collection at sluice gates by traps and by bag nets; seasonal fields

alternating paddy (monsoon) crop with shrimp/fish crop (inter

monsoon); fields called locally

as bheries, pokkali fields and

khazan lands.

Improved traditional:

System as above but with stock entry contra~

supplementary stocking with desired species of shrimp seed (P.

monodon or P. indicus); practised in ponds of smaller area 2-5 ha.

Extensive : New pond systems; 1-2 ha ponds; tidally fed; no water

exchange, stocking with seed; local feeds such

as clams, snails and

pond-side prepared feed with fishmeal, sova, oilcake, cereal flour

etc.; wet dough ball form; stocking density around

20,000/ha.

Modified Extensive System as above; pond preparation with tilling,

H liming and fertilisation; some water exchange with pumpsets; pellet

>

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 867

feeds indigenous or imported; stocking density around 50,000/ha. A

Semi-intensive New pond systems; ponds 0.25 to 1.0 ha in size;

elevated ground with supply and drainage canals; pond prepara-

tion methods carefully followed; regular and periodic water

ex­

change as required; pond aerators (paddle wheel) at 8 per ha;

generally imported feed with FCR better than

1:1.5 or high energy B

indigenous feeds; applications of drugs and chemicals when need

arises; regular monitoring and management stocking density

15-

25/ml.

Intensive

Ponds 0.25-0.30 ha in size; management practices as C

above; 4 aerators in each pond; salinity manipulation as possible;

central drainage system to remove accumulated sludge; imported

feed; drugs and chemicals and used as prophylactic measures;

strict control and management; stocking density 20-35/ml.

Changes in technology : As already indicated. The initial concept D

and practice was to develop tide-fed systems, this slowly gave way

to a pump-fed systems. Presently, the emphasis is on seawater

based fanning systems for P. monodon with a water intake system

extending far into the sea with submerged pipelines, pier system

and gravity

flow. From sandy clay soils, the present coastal farms E

are located in sandy soils also with Seepage-control

provisions."

Alagarswarni report further states as under :

"The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of

India, issued a Notification S.O. No. 114 ((b) in 1991, under 'The F

Environment (Protection) Act, 1986" declaring coastal stretches as

Coastal, Regulation Zones ( CRZ) and regulating activities .ffi the

CRZ. This Notification has implications for coastal aquaculture,

particularly those activities within 500 m from the High Tide Line ...

No regulations to control the use of chemicals and drugs exist.

Pollution Control Board general regulations on effluent discharges G

include hazardous substances, but they are not specified to

aquaculture. In some regions, there is indiscriminate use of chemi-

cals and pesticides, particularly in shrimp farms... Under the

Notification of Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, each

maritime State

is expected to have its own Coastal zone manage- H

868

A

. SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

ment plan, which would consider aquaculture zonation require­

ments, along with shoreline development. The zone up to 500

metres from the waterline along the sea is restricted against any

construction

activity."

Alagarswamy report High lights various environmental and social

B problems created by the Coastal Acquaculture. The relevant part of the

report

is as under :-

c

D

E

F

"Physical factors

Shrimp farming along the coastal area of the whole country is

developing at a rapid rate. Huge cyclone protection dykes and

peripheral dykes are constructed

by the shrirop farmers. In inany

cases

as in Kandleru creek (Andhra Pradesh), the farm areas are

the natural drainage areas for floods. Due to physical obstruction

caused

by the dykes, the natural drain is blocked and flood water

accumulates in the hinterland villages.

Protests are being made by

people in some of the villages against such dykes. The ponds are

constructed right on the bank of the creeks without leaving any

area

for draining of flood water.

Right of passage of coastal fishermen

The shrimp farms do not provide access to the beach for traditional

fishermen

who have to reach the sea from their villages. As farms

are located and entry

is restricted, the fishermen have to take a

longer route to the sea for their operations. This

is being objected

to by traditional fishermen.

Drinking water problems

The Corporate sector has purchased vast areas adjoining the

villages which, in some cases, include drinking water public wells

G of the villages. The villagers cannot use these wells anymore as

they are located in private land owned

by the farmers. This is

causing social problems.

Salinisation

H It is reported that salinisation of land is spreading further

·-

•

>

S.JAGANNATII v_ CT.OJ_ [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 869

landwards and the wells yields only saline water. In Tamil Nadu A

and Andhra Pradesh protests have been voiced against salinisation.

Some of the socially conscious shrimp farm operators are providing

drinking water to the affected villages by laying a pipeline from

their

own freshwater source wherever available. Apart from wells,

the agricultural farms adjoining the

shrimp farms are reported to

be affected. However, there is increasing conversion of paddy

fields as in the Bhimavaram area of Andhra Pradesh and even on

the fringes of Chilka Lake into shrimp farms.

Mangrove areas

The status report on mangroves of India published by the Ministry

of Environment and Forests (GO!, 1987)

is shown in Table 5. In

the earlier years, vast areas of mangrove were destroyed for

agriculture, aquaculture and other uses. In the more recent years,

B

c

the mangroves have been protected by law. However, the satellite

imagery pictures show destruction of mangroves in Krishna and

D

Guntur Districts of Andhra

Pradesh for construction of shrimp

farms. Gujarat State

is planning major

shrimp culture programmes

in the Narmada region adjoining Gulf of Cambay. Protection of

mangroves should receive attention".

Alagarswarni report further indicates that the demand for shrimp seed is

growing with the expansion of shrimp culture and hatchery production is

unable to meet it. Exploitation of natural seed resources is growing un­

abated, particularly

in West Bengal,

Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. Large

quantity of

fry by-catch are discarded by the fry collectors because their

value

is insignificant. The report states

"elimination of fry in the fry by-catch

is not only detrimental to the predators thriving on them, but it also creates

an ecological imbalance".

E

F

Agitations by the environmentally conscious people of the coastal­

areas against pollution acquaculture technologies has been noticed by

G

Alagarswamy report as under :-

People's awareness

People in general have become aware of the environmental issues

related to aquaculture. A current case in point

is the agitation H

870

A

B

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

against a large commercial farm coming up in Chilka Lake (Oris­

sa). People have demanded an BIA of the project. People in

Nellore District in Andhra Pradesh have raised environmental

issues and called for adoption of environmentally-friendly tech­

nologies and rejection of "imported" technologies from regions

which have suffered environmental damage. Protests have been

voiced by the local people in Tuticorin area in Tamil Nadu. Both

·print and visual media take up environmental issues with a great

deal of zeal. This appears to augur well for regulating coastal

shrimp farming with eco-friendliness".

C The intensive-farming technique and the pollutants generated by

such farming have been noticed by Alagaswamy in the following words :-

"In intensive farming, stocking densities are on the increase, in

one instance, P. indicus was stocked at 70 post larvae/ml, almost

reaching the levels of Taiwan before the disease outbreak in

1988.

D This necessitates heavy inputs of high energy feeds, the use of drugs

and chemicals and good water exchange. The organic load and

accumulation of metabolites in the water drained into the sea

should

be very high as could be seen from the dark-brown colour

and consistency of the drain

water."

E

F

The Alagaswamy report further states that paddy fields are being

converted to shrimp farms,

as in some parts of Andhra

Pradesh (e.g.

Bhimavaram). Some paddy lands along the fringe of Chilka Lake have been

lost to shrimp farming.

The report suggests future management strategies - quoted

hereunder -for farms and Government in resolving any conflicts or

environmental problems :

"As shrimp farming is developing fast, the following strategies have

been developed for avoiding problems which have arisen in other

G countries (or reducing their impact) :

H

1. India needs to boost production of shrimp through aquaculture

with environment and development

as a unified motto.

2.

Since the area available is vast, this can be achieved by applica­

tion of environmentally-friendly technologies for optimal produc-

>

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KUl...DIPSINGH,J.] 871

tion rates against maximum production rates.

3. Sustainable development of shrimp aquaculture should be

guided

by the principles of social equity, nutritional security, en­

vironmental protection and economic development with a holistic

approach to achieve long-term benefits.

4. New definitions and parameters of extensive, semi-intensive and

intensive culture systems

as suited to Indian conditions. and

Government policies rather than copying models of other countries

(particularly those which have rushed and suffered) and the

development of guidelines thereof.

5. Diversification of species among shrimps and to integrate fish

wherever possible

to. suit the different agro-climatic and aquatic

· zones. of the country.

A

B

c

6. Careful development of Coastal Zone Management Plans under D

CRZ to meet the requirements of coastal aquaculture develop­

ment plans with some flexibility (as required) for specific areas.

7. Identification of aquaculture zones or careful consideration and

provision of buffer zones against possible impact on other land

uses; also intermediate buffer zones within aquaculture zones. E

8. Consideration of the living, social and vocational needs of local

people

in villages/towns in aquaculture plans in order to avoid

. conflicts.

9. Development of sets of regulations on use/ban of drugs and

chemicals, including antibiotics, in hatcheries and farms; on

abstrac\ion of groundwater and salinisation problems.

10. Development of standards for effluent discharge as applicable

to local conditions.

11. Development of viable technologies for secondary aquaculture

to gainfully utilise nutrient enriched farm effluents an encourage

farmers to adopt such technologies with the necessary support.

F

G

U. In view of the fact that coastal farms are located generally in H

872

A

B

c

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

remote areas and cannot be monitored by external agencies on a

reasonable effective basis, farmers/group of farmers should equip

themselves with facilities to monitor possible important parameters

at periodic intervals and maintain such records for their own

benefits and for production to inspecting agencies.

13. Brackishwater Fish Farmer Development Agencies to be

strengthened in all respects, including environmental management

and disease diagnosis, prevention and control, through appropriate

training and setting up district level laboratories for essential

analytical and diagnostic work.

14. Manpower development at managerial and technical level.

15. Research-extension-farmer group meet for appropriate tech­

nologies and feedback.

D 16. Effective monitoring and enforcement of regulations, use of

nets and fishing in

any specified water for a period not exceeding

two years. Thus, legal provisions were made on fisheries matters

in India nearly a century

ago."

E Alagarswami's report identifies salinisation of land, salinisation of drinking

water wells, obstruction of natural drainage of flood water, passage of

access to sea by fishermen and public, self-pollution of ponds, pollution of

source water, destruction of mangroves land subsidence and pressure on

wild seed resources and consequences thereof

as environmental issues in

F

G

shrimp culture. Para 6.2 of the report lists the following preventive

measures:

"6.2 PREVENTION

(i) Aquaculture units cansing harmful changes to the environ-

11'.ent; and

(ii) Non-aquaculturists from modifying the environment to the

detriment of aquaculture production units.

1. Enforcement of legal provisions under the relevant Acts of

H the government.

. S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 873

2. CRZ regulations to consider specific needs of aquaculture A

as an expanding production activity and the Coastal Zone Manage­

ment Plans of the States/Union Territories to carefully plan taking

into consideration present situation and future needs.

3. Early development of regulations on permissible levels of

most sigoificant parameters of water quality keeping

in view the B

limited intervention of aquaculture for promoting growth of stock

in the medium.

4. Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental

Monitoring Plan (EMP) to be insisted upon for larger units and

C

sell assessment/monitoring for smaller units, subject to verification

at inspection.

5. Zonations and appropriate siting of farms; not to prolitferate

indiscriminately but to develop in a planned manner for sustaining

production (Alagarswarni,

1991). D

6. More hatcheries to be encouraged and supported to meet

seed demands to reduce pressure on wild seed resources.

7. Feed mills to maintain quality of feeds and to ensure water

stability

as required; self/external inspection mechanism to be

introduced to maintain specific standards.

8. Mangrove forests not to be touched for aquaculture pur­

poses.11

The FAO report -based on Alagarswami report states the impact of

aquaculture on the environment, in India, as under

:-

"The impact of aquaculture on the environment are as follows :

E

F

By shrimp culture : Loss of agricultural land and G

mangroves, obstruction of natural drains, salinisation,

destruction

· of natural seed • ~sources, use of drugs and

chemicals, and extraction of groundwater, Social ccnflicts

have arisen.

11

Algarswami report -quoted by us extensively - 1s an authentic H

874 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A document relating to the functioning of shrimp culture industry in India. It

has rightly been suggested in the report that sustainable development

should be the guiding principle for the shrimp aquaculture. The industry

must develop under the unified motto of Environment and Development.

Environmentally-friendly technologies are to

be adopted with a view to

B achieve .optimal production. The report calls for a ban on the use of drugs,

chemicals and antibiotics in the shrimp culture farms. The report clearly

indicates that except the traditional and improved

traditiona~ the other

methods of shrimp aquaculture are polluting and

as such may have an

adverse

imJ>act on the environment.

C Mr. M.C. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner, has taken us

through the NEER! reports and other voluminous material on the record.

He has vehemently contended that the modern • other than traditional ·

techiques or shrimp farming are highly polluting and are detrimental to the

coastal environment and marine ecology. According to him only the tradi·

tional and improved traditional systems of shrimp farming which are

D environmentally friendly should be permitted. Mr. Mehta has taken us

through the Notification dated February 19, 1991 issued by the Government

of India under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (the

Act) (CRZ Notification) and has vehemently contended that setting up of

shrimp farms on the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers

E and backwaters up to

500 metres from the High Tide Line (HTL) and the

line between the Low Tide Line (L TL) and the HTL is totally prohibited

under Para 2 of the said notification. The relevant part of the notification

is as under:

F

G

H

'2. Prohibited Activities :

The following activities are declared as prohibited within the

Coastal Regulations Zone, namely :

(i) Setting up of new Industries and expansion of existing

industries, except those directly related to water front or directly

needing fore-shore facilities.

(ii) Manufacture or handling or storage or disposal of hazard­

ous substances as specified in the Notifications of the government

of India in the Ministry of Environment

& Forests No.s. 0.59.l(E)

dated 28th July,

1989,

S.O. 966(E) dated 27th November, 1989 and

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. (KULDIPSINGH,J.]

GSR 108/(E) dated 5th December, 1989 :

PJ/5

(iii) Setting up and expansion of fish processing units including

warehousing (excluding hatchery and natural fish drying in per­

mitted areas);

A

(v) Discharge of untreated wastes and effluent from industries, B

cities settlements.

Schemes shall be implemented by the concerned

authorities phasing out the existing practices, in and within a

reasonable time period not exceeding three years from the date of

this notification.

(viii) land reclamation, bunding or disturbing natural course of

sea water with similar obstructions, except those required for

control of coastal erosion and maintenance clearing of waterways,

channels and for prevention of sandbars and all except for tidal

regulators.

Storm water drains and structures for prevention of

c

salinity ingrease and for sweet water recharge. D

(x) harvesting or drawal of ground water and construction of

mechanisms therefore with 200 m or HTL; in the 200 m to 500 m

Zone it shall

be permitted only when do manually through ordinary

wells for draining, horticulture, agriculture and fishering." E

According to Mr. Mehta the shrimp culture industry is neither · "directly related to water from" nor "directly needing fore-shore facility"

and as such is a prohibited activity under Para 2(1) of CRZ Notification.

Mr. Kapil Sibal on the other hand has argued that a shrimp farm is an

industry which is directly related to water front and cannot exist without F

fore-shore facilities. Relying upon Oxford English Dictionary Mr. Sibal

contended that "water front" means land abetting on the sea, that part of

a town which fronts on a body of water. According to him "foreshore in

terms of the said dictionary means the part of the shore that lies between

the High Tide and the Low Tide. According to Webster Comprehensive

G

Dictionary, International Edition the expression 'foreshore means "that

part of a shore uncovered at

low tide".

It is, thus, clear that the part of the shore which remains covered with

water at the High Tide and gets uncovered and become visible at the Low

Tide

is called "foreshore". It is not possible to set up a shrimp culture farm H

876 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A in the said. area because it would completely sub-merge in water at the

High Tide.

It is, therefore, obvious that foreshore facilities are neither

directly nor indirectly needed in the setting up of a shrimp farm.

So far as

B

' .

"water front" is concerned it is no doubt correct that a shrimp farm may

have some relation to the water front in the sense that the farm is depend-

ent

on brackish water which can be drawn from the sea. But on a close

scrutiny,

we are of the view that shrimp culture farming has no relation or

connection with the 'water front' though it has relation with brackish water

which

is available from various water-bodies including sea. What is re­

quired

is the

"brackish water" and not the 'water front'. The material on

record

shows that the shrimp ponds constructed by the farmers draw water

C from the sea by pipes, jetties etc. It is not the 'water front' which is needed

by the industry, what is required is the brakishwater which can be drawn

from

any source including sea and carried to any distance by pipes etc. The

purpose

of CRZ notification is to protect the ecological fragile coastal

areas and to safe guard the aesthetic qualities and uses of the sea coast.

D The setting up of modern shrimp aquaculture farms right on the sea coast

and construction of ponds and other infrastructure thereon

is per se

hazardous and is bound to degrade the marine ecology, coastal environ­

ment and the aesthetic uses of the sea coast. We have, therefore, no

hesitation in holding that the shrimp culture industry

is neither

"directly

related to water front" nor "directly needing foreshore facilities". The

E setting up of shrimp culture farms within the prohibited areas under the

CRZ notification cannot be permitted.

Para 2 (viii) of the CRZ Notification quoted above, prohibits the

bunding or disturbing the natural course of sea water with similar obstruc-

F tions. A bond is an embankment or dyke. Alagarswami report in para 4.3.2

(quoted above) has specifically mentioned that huge cyclone protection

dykes and peripheral dykes are constructed

by the shrimp farmers. The

report further states that due

to physical obstruction caused by the dykes

the natural drain is blocked and flood water accumulated in the hinterland

and villages. The report notices that the shrimp ponds are constructed right

G on the bank of the creeks without leaving

any area for draining of flood

waters. A shrimp farm on the coastal area;

by itself operates as a dyke or

a bund

as it leaves no area for draining of the flood waters. The construc­

tion of the shrimp farms, Therefore, violate clause

(viii) of para 2 of the

CRZ Notification. In view of the findings by Alagarswarni report it may be

H useful to hold an inquiry/investigation to fmd out the extent of loss oc-

'

-

...

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.]

curred, if any, to the villages during the recent cyclone in the State of A

Andhra Pradesh because of the dykes constructed by the shrimp farmers.

Annexure-1 to the CRZ Notification contains regulations regarding

Coastal Area Classification and Development. The coastal stretches within

500 m of HTL of the landward side are classified into four categories, B

namely, CRZ-1, CRZ-II, CRZ-III and CRZ-IV. Para 6(2) of the CRZ

Notification lays down the norms for the development or construction

activities in different categories of CRZ areas. In CRZ-III Zone agricul­

ture, horticulture, gardens, pastures, parks, playfields, forestry, and salt

manufacture from sea level

may be permitted upto

200 m from the high

c

tide line. The aquaculture or shrimp farming has not been included as a

permissible

use and as is prohibited even in this zone. A relevant point

arises at this stage.

Salt manufacturing process like the shrimp culture

industry depends on sea water. Salt manufacturers can also raise the

argument that since they are

wholly dependent on sea-water theirs is an

industry

"directly related to water front" or directly needing fore-shore D

facilities". The argument stands negatived by inclusion of the salt manufac­

turing industry in CRZ-III Zone under para 6(2) of the CRZ notification

otherwise it

was not necessary to include the industry therein because it

could be set-up any where in the coastal regulation zone in terms or para

2(1) of the

CRZ Notification. It is thus obvious that an industry dependent E

on sea water cannot by itself is an industry "directly related to water front"

or "directly needing fore-shore facilities". The shrimp culture industry,

therefore, cannot be permitted to be set up any where in the coastal

regulation zone under the CRZ notification.

We

may examine the issue from another angle.

Sea coast and beaches

are a

gift of the nature to the mankind. The aesthetic qualities and

recreational utility of the said area has to be maintained. Any activity which

has the affect of degrading the environment cannot be permitted. Apart

from that the right of the fishermen and farmers living in the coastal areas

F

to eke their living by way of fishing and farming cannot be denied to them. G

Alagarswami report states that

"the shrimp farms do not provide excess to

the beach for traditional fishermen

who have to reach the sea from their

villages.

As farms are located and entry is restricted the fishermen have to

take a longer route

to the sea for their operation. This is being objected

by traditional

fishermen". H

878 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A The Algarswami report further highlights drinking water problem,

salinisation and destruction of mangrove

by the shrimp

culture industry.

The relevant paragraphs have already been quoted above. The increase of

stocking densities,

heavy inputs of high energy feeds, use of drugs and

chemicals

result in the discharge of highly polluted effluent into the sea,

B creeks etc. and on the sea coast by the shrimp farms. It is, therefore, not

possible to agree with Mr. Sibal that commercial shrimp farming has no

adverse affect on environment and coastal ecology.

We

may at this stage refer to the two investigation reports dated April 23;

1995 and

July 10, 1995 by NEER! regarding the Ecological Fragile coastal

C areas of India.

The Report dated .April

23, 1995 states that a 13 member team of

scientists,

lead by Dr. AS. ·Bali and Dr. S.K. Kaul inspected the shrimp

farms situated on the ecological fragile coastal areas in the States of

Andhra·Pradesh and Tamil Nadu between April 10 and April 19, 1995. It ·

D is further stated that the coastal areas in the Union Territory of Pondicher­

ry were also inspected by the team. Regarding the CRZ Notification, the

report states

as under :-

E

F

G

H

"The MEF's notification dated February 19, 1995 stipulates that

the aquacukure farms on the coastal areas should not be con­

structed within

500 m from the high tide

line {HTL) of the seas.

The hatcheries, however may be constructed between 250 and 500

m from HTL of the sea.

The inspection team observed during field investigations that

the MEF's norms for location of aquaculture and hatcheries have

be~n violated in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and

the union territory of Pondicherry ...... There is an urgent need to

ensure scrupulous implementation of the provisions made in the

MEF's notification dated February

19, 1991 in the States and

Union Territory inspected by the team. In addition, the damage

caused to the land and water ecosystems by coastal aquaculture

activity, as detailed in the report, must be restored to its original

ecological State. The cost for eco-restoration of the coastal fragile

area must be borne

by

individual entrepreneurs of the coastal

aquaculture farms in keeping with the Polluter-Pays principle .

..... Further, no activity of commercial coastal aquaculture should

-

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 879

be undertaken even beyond 500 m HTL unless a comprehensive A

and scientific Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study has

been conducted

by the entrepreneur, and the Environmental

Management

Plan approved by the respective State Department

of -Environment. Pollution Control Board, Shore Development

Authority, and also

by the Ministry of Environment and Forests. B

·

Appropriate terms of reference for EIA have been incorporated

in.the report."

Regarding the socio-economic assessment of acquaculture in the

area, the report

gives the following finding :-

"A socio-economic assessment of aquaculture in the ecologically

fragile coastal areas in the States of AP and TN has been con­

ducted

by the NEER! team. This assessment, detailed in the

report, indicates that the cost of ecological and social damage far

exceeds the benefits that accrue out of coastal aquaculture ac­tivities.11

· The adverse impacts of acquaculture farming on the environment and the

ecologically fragile areas in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and

union territory of Pondicherry have been stated in the report as under :-

C

D

"3.0 Observations on the impacts of Aquaculture Farming on E

Ecologically Fragile Areas in States of AP, TN, and Union Ter­

ritory of Pondicherry.

Coastal aquaculture units are situated within 500 m of high Tide

Line of the sea. T\lis is not in consonance with the MEFs notifica-

F

tion dated February 19, 1991.

It is a common practice to convert agricultural land, and land

under said production, into coastal aquaculture units which infr­

inges the fundamental rights to life and livelihood.

Conversion of agricultural farms and salt making lands into com-

mercial aquaculture farms

is rampant in the fragile coastal areas

of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and

Union Territory of Pon­

dicherry.

G

Brackish aquaculture units have been installed in deltaic regions H

880

A

B

c

D

E

F

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

which is a ecologically unsound practice.

Natural

saline. canals which travel from sea to the mainland are

being used for brackish aquaculture farming. The

flow of the

natural saline canals

is being obstructed due to prawn farming

activity which has resulted in the spread of brackish water over

agricultural farms resulting in loss of agricultural lands, and

potable water.

Villages situated along the sea coast, deltaic regions, and natural

saline canals are under threat due to diversion of land to aquacul­

ture farms.

Traditional fishermen have lost their landing grounds for fish catch.

Coastal aquaculture has resulted

in loss of mangrove eco-systems

which provide protection against cyclones and other natural

hazards, and which provide natural habitats for spawning of marine

biota. Indiscriminate obstruction of mangrove areas in and around

the creeks, estuaries, and sea has resulted in loss of natural breed­

ing grounds for shrimps.

Natural Casuarine plantations have also been destroyed. This may

result in increasing damage from cyclons, and intrnsion of saline

water into mainland.

Coastal aquaculture farms have not been scientifically designed

and located, resulting in excessive ecological damages.

No proper peripheral drainage has been provided around the

aquaculture farms.

The saline water intake and effluent discharge points from

aquaculture farms are located in close vicinity, resulting in con-

G lamination of feed water to the aquaculture units threatening their

productivity.

-

Three types of saline water supply systems are in vogue for the

'1 ·~

aquaculture farming, viz.

H - direct pumping from the sea, creek, and estuary.

-..

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 881

-direct pumping from deep sea with jetties

-using high tides of sea

for carrying saline water through ex­

cavated canals.

These activities for feed water supply to the aquaculture ponds

A

have resulted in : B

-loss of

fish catch (except in the case of feed water supply through

sea water canal system)

-loss due to damage of fishing nets.

-degradation of fragile coastal land.

Large commercial aquaculture farms have installed fencing in and

around the farms resulting in blockage of free access for the

fisherman to the sea shore.

The wastewater discharge from the aquaculture farms released

into the creeks

is not properly flushed out of the creek during low

tides thereby leads in the accumulation of pollutants in the creek,

affecting the quality of intake water to aquaculture farm with a

concommittant loss in productivity, and damage to creek ecosys­

tem.

Disappearance of the native

fish species due to increase in salinity

of the creek water has been observed

by the team, and reported

by the fishermen. Increase

in salinity has also reduced the ingress

of shrimp seedlings in the creek.

Indiscriminate catch of natural shrimp seedlings from the coastal

waters, creeks, and estuaries has resulted in reduction of their

availability, which in turn has forced the commercial aquaculture

farmers to import the seeds.

Unscientific management practices adopted

by the commercial

aquaculture farmers, and improper design

cf aquaculture farms

including inadequate drainage systems have resulted in skin, eye,

and water borne diseases in the contiguous population.

c

D

E

F

G

Commercial aquaculture farm owners have not contributed to any H

A

B

c

D

E

. F

882 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

social infrastructure facilities for the villagers.

Employment avenues of the contiguous population have consider­

ably reduced due to the commercial aquaculture farming. The

unemployed villagers are seeking employment in nearby

towns and

cities.

. Owners of the commercial aquaculture farms are using various

means

to encroach upon the Government lands and also forcing

the agricultural land owners/salt making villagers to sell their lands.

In addition, the fishermen are also being forced

to migrate to other

coastal

areas.

11

Regarding the socio-economic status of the ecologically fragile coastal

areas in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, the report states

as under:-

"During the inspection of the aquaculture units located on the

Ecologically Fragile Coastal Areas of AP and TN, the inspection

team collected data and information, and discussed the issues

related to socio-economic status of the affected people with the

farmers, fishermen, NGOs, and Government officials.

The basic socio-economic issues are presented in Table

4.1 which

also lists the parametric values in the assessment of the damage

caused

by the aquaculture units located in the Ecologically Fragile

Coastal Areas. Tables

4.2 and 4.3 present the socio-economic

assessment of aquaculture in the Ecologically Fragile Coastal Area

of the

States of AP and TN .

Tables.4.2 and

4.3 bring forth that the damage caused to ecology

and economics

by the aquaculture farming is higher than the

earnings from the sale of coastal aquaculture

produce."

The NEER! has, thus, given a positive finding that the damage

G caused to ecology and economics by the acquaculture farming is higher

than the earnings from the sale of coastal acquaculture produce. The

finding

is based on the assessment keeping in view fourteen parameters

listed in Tables

4.2 & 4.3 regarding the

States of Andhra Pradesh and

Tamil Nadu respectively. The parameters taken into consideration are

H land, equivalent wages for the farmers

to be earned, equivalent amount of

.. -

•

..

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 883

agricultural produce (rice, husk), loss due to.cutting of Casuarina in terms A

of fuel, loss in terms of grazing grounds, loss involving diseases, loss caused

by cyclones due to cutting of Casuarina forests, loss due to desertification

of land,

loss in terms of potable water, total loss due to mangrove destruc­

tion,

loss in fishing income, loss due to damage of fishing nets and man­

days lost due to non-approachability to sea-coast. These losses are

computed in money and are then

compared with the total earnings from

the sale

of coastal acquaculture produce.

On the basis of the assessment

of socio-economic status of acquacwture in a systematic manner the

NEERI

has. reached the conclusion that the damage caused to ecology and

economics

by the acquaculture farming is higher than the earnings from

the sale

of coastal acquaculture produce.

Paras 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 of the report clearly show the environmental degrada­

tion caused

by the shrimp culture farming by its adverse impact on surface

water, contamination of soil and ground water and destruction of mangrove

vegetation. The said paragraphs are reproduced hereunder

:-

"6.1 Impact on Surface Waters

B

c

D

Mangrove vegetation is important in protecting marine and

terrestrial ecosystem. This vegetation is also important

as it

removes the pollutants like carbon, nitrogen, phosphate and other

E

nutrients; as also certain

toxic compounds. The importance of

mangrove plants especially V ettivera zaizonoids is known in reduc-

ing the impact of pollution due to discharge of aquaculture pond

effluents, and the Cavery Delta Farmers are no propagating the

cultivation of this species in estuaries. Mangrove vegetation also

acts

as a barrier of floods, and provides spawning grounds and F

nesting places for fishes; it also supports avian fauna {birds) thus

· maintaining the natural ecosystem.

The observations on the water quality in the aquaculture ponds

show that the pond water harbors a dense algal bloom compared

to the water in estuaries, creeks or sea indicating eutrophic nature G

of pond effluent. When water in large volumes, from the ponds

is

discharged during flusing of ponds, in a creek or estuary, the

pollutants remain stagnated in the estuary or near-sea coast due

to the typical tidal activity in creeks. As a result, the raw water

source to the ponds gets contanrinated in course of time. The H

884 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A

wastewater discharged from the ponds warrant proper treatment

.;.

before discharge. Uncontrolled discharge of wastewater triggers a

series of deleterious impacts,

e.g.

With the increase in eutrophication levels, there is a shifting in

dominance of phytoplankton flora in pond effluent from diatoms

B to blue-green algae. Decomposition of dead blue-green algae may

lead to the generation of toxic substanGes, eg. ammonia, hydrogen

sulphide etc. Further, . some of the blue-greens also excrete

biotoxins in large quantities which are toxic to aquatic animals, ie.

prawns in ponds or fishes in estuaries or coastal waters. Large

c

amount of blue-green algae was recorded by the inspection team

in Sirkali area

( eg. S&S Industries & Enterprises Ltd.; High Tide

Sea farms) and Killai area (Aqua Gold Shrimp Farm; MRV Aqua

Farm; Mahi Aqua Farm). The presence of Oscillatoria, Microcys-

tis and some other filamentous blue-green algae

is undesirable in

D

the pond effluent as they chock the gills of fishes.

-The suspended solids released from the ponds are laden with

unconsumed food and other organic ·contaminants. Accumulation

of these organics in

the intake water creates problems in the intake

water quality when the intake and discharge points are in close

E

proximity.

6.2 Contamination of soil and ground water

The shrimp farms are constructed well above the ground levels.

Seepage of po.nd

effluent in the surrounding fields was noted by

F

the inspection team in a number of farms. Seepage of pond effluent

deteriorates the soil quality in the adjoining aquacultural fields. It

has also contaminated potable water

in surrounding villages.

Deterioration of ground

Water quality in villages that over one

km away from the pond sites

was not noticed. This observation is

G based on analysis of bore well water at three sites by the inspection

team. This observation justified the locational constraints on

aquaculture farms in coastal areas.

.,.~

6.3. Destruction of Mangrove vegetation

H The inspection team noticed destruction of mangrove vegeta-

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.j 885

tion at most of the prawn farming sites for the development of A

shrimp farms.

Significant destruction of mangrove forest

was observed near

the Aqua Gold shrimp farm at village Vellar in Killai taluk of

South

Arco! district similarly on Pichavarum estuary in village

Pichavarum in Killai taluk of South Ar cot district of TN, the shrimp

farms are constructed by clearing Mangrove vegetation Mangrove

in Kuchipalarn village

is also facing threat due to the expansion of

prawn farming activity.

B

The final conclusions and recommendations are in para

8.0 of the NEER! C

report which is as under :-

"8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations on the attenuation of the

Impact of Aquaculture Farming

on Ecologically Fragile Areas in

States of AP, TN, and Union Territory of Pondicherry.

Socio-economic assessment of aquaculture in the ecologically

fragile areas in the

States of AP and TN reveals that the coast of

ecological and social damage far exceed the benefits that accrue

out of the coastal aquaculture activities.

The MEF's norms for location of aquaculture and hatcheries

have been violated in the States of AP, TN, and Union Territory

of Pondicherry.

The current practice of installation of coastal aquaculture farms

within 500 m HTL violates the fundamental rights and livelihood

of people in the States AP and TN, and the Union Territory of

Pondicherry.

D

E

F

The

State of AP has adopted twenty point guidelines as ad hoc

measures for management of aquaculture in the district of Nellore.

These guidelines have not been made mandatory in the State of G

AP as a whole. Also, these guidelines do not address all social,

economic, and ecological aspects of coastal habitats.

The State Government of TN has enacted a Bill to provide for

the regulation of coastal aquaculture on April 10, 1995. This Bill

is not in consonance with the MEF's notification dated 19, 1991 H

886

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

as it allows the construction of aquaculture units within 500 m of

HTL of the sea.

The cost of eco-restoration of the coastal fragile area must be

borne

by the individual entrepreneur of the commercial aquacul­

ture farms in keeping with the polluter-pays principle.

No commercial coastal aquaculture activity should be under­

taken even beyond

500 m HTL unless a comprehensive and scien­

tific environmental impact assessment (EIA) study has been

conducted

by the entrepreneur, and the environment management

plan

(EMP) approved by the respective State Department of

Environment. Pollution Control Board, Shore Development

Authority, and also

by the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

Agricultural lands are being converted into commercial

aqnaculture farms, which causes unemployment to the landless

labourers and also in

loss of cultivable land.

Commercial aquaculture farms are being installed near the

cultivated lands aud the salt water from the farms damages the

productivity of the adjoining lands.

Groundwater also gets contaminated due to seepage of

im­

pounded water from the aquaculture ponds.

Desertification of cultivable land

is on the increase due to

salinity intrusion.

Due

to commercial aquaculture farms, there is a loss of

-mangrove ec.osystems

-casuarina plantations

-grazing grounds for cattle

-potable water to contiguous population

-fish catch

-fishing nets

-agricultural produce

-manpower loss due to non-approachability of fishermen to sea

shore directly.

S.JAGANNATH v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 887

There is a perceptible increase in the diseases of skin and eye, A

and water borne diseases in the contaguous population.

The designs of the aquaculture farms are inadequate.

No

provision has been made for wastewater treatment facility enabling

recycling and re-use

?f wastewater.

Prohibition on conversion of agricultural lands and salt farms

into commercial aquaculture farms must be enforced with imme­

diate effect.

No groundwater withdrawal must be allowed for aquaculture

purposes

..

Free access through aquaculture unit to the sea coast must be

provided to the traditional fishermen.

B

c

No aquaculture farm based on brackish water should be in- D

stalled on inland brackish water bodies.

Wild seed collection from creek and sea must

be prohibited.

Seed must be procured from hatcheries. If seed collection is

noticed it must immediately be seized and dumped back into the

creek. fl

An eco-restoration fund must be created by collecting the

stipulated fees from the owners of aquaculture farms. In addition,

one per cent of total export earnings per annum must also be

collected from commercial aquaculture farm owners and used for

rejuvenation of coastal. eco-system with special reference to plan-

F

talion of mangroves and common eco-sensitive zones. The was­

tewater treatment system with reuse and recycle must be installed

by all units. The smaller units can form a co-operative and treat

their water through common effluent treatment plant. The

aquaculture units must

be closed down if the wastewater treatment G

system is not functioning to its design efficiency."

The second NEER! report dated July

10, 1995 states that a 19

member team of scientists lead by Dr. A.S. Ball and Dr. S.N. Kaul in­

spected the shrimp farms situated on the ecologically fragile coastal areas

in the States of West Bengal, Orissa, Kerala, Karnataka, Goa, Maharashtra H

888 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A and Gujarat during May 20 and June 10, 1995. The summary of salient

comments in the report regarding acqua-farming in the State of West

Bengal

is as under :-

"*

B *

'

•

c

*

D *

*

E •

F

organic pollution in creeks and estuaries with respect to BOD

microbiological deterioration of water quality

accumulation of organic carbon and heavy metals

m the

sediments of shrimp farms

Shanon Weaver index values less than

3 indicate organic

contamination

borewell water characteristics near Mis Index

Port Ltd., Sar­

beria, Basanti, North 24-Paraganas, show intrusion of salinity

in drinking water source

conversion of land, and traditional fish farm at

Mis Index

Port

Ltd., North 24-Paraganas

conversion of land, traditional

fish farm, and mangrove plan­

tation at

Mis Sundarban Aquatics, South 24-Paraganas

violation of CRZ regulations regarding high tide line (HTL)

has taken place at Mis Sundarban Aquatics, South 24-

Paraganas. In addition, violations of CRZ for setting up the

aquafarm on creeks have taken place at the following places:

Mis Index Port Ltd., North 24-Paraganas

Mis Sundarban Aquatics, South 24-Paraganas

All shrimp farms developed

by BWFD at Ramnagar, Mid­

napore."

G The comments regarding the acqua-farming in the State of Orissa by the

NEERI team are

as under :-

"*

H *

Organic pollution in creeks and estuaries with respect to

BUD

deterioration of microbiological water quality

*

*

S. JAGANNATH v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 889

accumulation of organic carbon and heavy metals in the A

sediments of shrimp farms

Shannon Weaver index values less than 3 indicate organic

contamination

* characteristics of borewell water samples near

Mis Sundeep B

Aquatics, District Bhadrak and M/s Suryo Udyog Pvt. Ltd.,

District Balasore, show intrusion of salinity into drinking

water

•

•

conversion of cultivable land for the establishment of C

aquafarms/hatcheries in all districts

violation of

CRZ regulations by all aquafarms on creeks in

the districts of Balasore and Bhadrak. Hatcheries have been

constructed/under construction within

200 m of high tide Line

(HTL) in contravance of

CRZ

regulations." D

The status of acqua-farming in the State of Kerala as indicated in the

NEER! report is as under :-

"The comments on aquafarming in the State of Kerala presented

in the footnotes of Tables

2.21.2 through 2.2.1.7. Summary of the E

salient comments is given hereunder:

•

•

•

•

•

•

organic pollution in river, creeks and estuaries

deterioration of microbiological water quality

accumulation of organic carbon and heavy metals in the

sediments of shrimp farms

Shanon Weaver index values less than 3 indicate organic

contamination

well water characteristics in the vicinity of Mis Agalapuzha

aquafarm. Kozhikode show the intrusion of salinity

in drink­

ing water source

conversion of land, and traditional fish farm by M/s vasu

F

G

Aquafarms at Kozhikode - H

A

B

c

D

890

•

•

SUPREME COURT REPORTS

[1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

conversion of land, traditional fish farm, and mangrove plan­

tation by Mis West Coast Aquafarms Irioavu, Kannur

violation of

CRZ regulations regarding the location of

aquafarms on creeks has taken place at the following sites:

Mis Consolidated Aquafarm,

Poyya, Trissur

Mis Jaladhi Aquafarm, Cherchi

Mis Keetodiyal Aquafarm, Arookutty Alleppey

M/s Mejovi Fisheries, Iranavu,

K.annur

11

•

The report farther indicates the status of acqua-culture io the State of

Karnataka

as under

:·

"Organic pollution in river, creeks, and estuaries

Shanon Weaver index values less than 3 indicate organic con·

tarnioation

well water characteristics io vicinity of Mis Raja Ram Bhat

Aquafarm, Hanmav, Kum ta show the intrusion of salinity io driok ·

E ing water source

F

G

conversion of agricultural land ioto shrimp farms was observed at

Mis Popular Aquafarm, Iallur, Kundapur

Mis Raja Ram Bhat Aquafarm, Hanmav, Kumta

Mis Shri Arya Durga Aquafarm, Karwar

destruction of mangrove vegetation

by Mis

Popular Aquafarm,

Iallur, Kundapur

was observed by the iospection team

violation of

CRZ regulations by aquafarms situated on the creek

of kazadi river at Kundapur, Hanmav creek at Kumta, and

Hgnash­

ree creeks were noted by the inspection team."

The comments of the NEER! report regarding acqua farms in the State of

H Goa are as under :-

..

•

•

•

•

•

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 891

organic pollution in river, estuary and discharges from ponds A

Shanon Weaver index values less than 3 indicate organic

contamination

well water characteristics in vicinity of

Mis Govt. Prawn Farm,

Choraho indicate salinity intrusion

B

conversion of agricultural land into shrimp farm was observed

by the inspection team at M/s

Sky Pak Aquafarm Ltd.,

Paliyam, Goa

violation of

CRZ regulations by all the aquafarms on the C

creeks, viz. Masem creek at Kankun, and Chahora at

Pernem

were observed by the inspection team."

Summary of the salient comments on acqua-culture in the State of

Maharashtra is as under :-

D

'*

organic pollution in river estuary and discharges from ponds

• microbiological deterioration of water quality

* accumulation of organic carbon and heavy metals in the

sediments of shrimp farms

E

•

•

•

-

Shanon Weaver index values less than 3 indicate organic

contamination

conversion of agricultural land into shrimp farms

violation of

CRZ regulations regarding location of shrimp

farm on creeks,

viz Dharamtar, Satpati, and Dahanu."

The comments regarding the State of Gujarat are as under :-

F

'organic pollution in river, estuary and discharges from ponds G

destruction of mangrove and shrubs in the marine zone bv M/s

GFCCA, Onjal and M/s Sea Crest Pvt. Ltd., Mendhar

violation of

CRZ regulations for setting up the shrimp farms on

the creeks,

viz. Kanai, Ambika, and

Puma.' H

892 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A Para 3 of the NEERI report dated July 10, 1995 gives in detail the impact

of aquaculture farming on ecologic_ruly fragile coast.U areas of India :-

B

c

D

E

F

G

"3.0 Observations on the impacts of Aquaculture Farming on

Ecologic<tlly Fragile Coastal Areas of India

3.1 East Coast

• The shrimp farms at Rarnnagar, Midnapur district are located

right on the creek, and therefore, are not

in consonance with the

CRZ regulations

• No wastewater/sediment treatment facilities exist at any of the

aquaculture farms

• No direct withdrawal of water from creek/estuary

• No conversion of land has taken place except in cases of M/s

Index Port Ltd., North 24-Paraganas and M/s Sundarban Aquatic

Farms Ltd., South 24-Paraganas

. • wild shrimp seedling collection by villagers including children is

a common practice

• M/s Index Port Ltd. North 24 Paraganas has created the follow­

ing problems :

-design of aquaculture farm

is not proper, and no wastewater/sedi­

ment treatment facility exists in this shrimp farm

-intensive mode of operation creates wastewater problems.

Presently, there

is no treatment facility existing for reuse and

recycle of treated wastewater

-deposition of clay in the intake water reservoir and no proper

mechanism exists for its disposal

-seepage from the bunds create additional problems around the

farm

-inspection team observed that groundwater in the vicinity of this

H aquaculture farm has become

s<tline

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 893

-conversion of agricultural land, and traditional fishing farm A

-barbed wire fencing along the periphery of the farm has resulted

in restriction to free access for the farmers, fishermen and cattle

to the creek

-M/s Sundarban Aquatic Farms Ltd., South 24-Paraganas has B

created the following problems :

-conversion of agricultural land, traditional fish farming, and

mangrove plantation

-the aquafarm

is located below ground level, therefore, it is C

difficult to assess the seepages from this farm unless peizometers

are installed around the aquafarm

- a well designed sedimentation tank is being used

as a waste water

·

treatment system. However, it is not adequate. Necessary arrange- D

men(s have to be made for recycle and reuse of wastewater

-no provision exists for treatment of sediments

-the location of the aqua-farm

is not as per MEF notification

dated February

19, 1991, keeping in view high tide line, and E

minimum distance from the creek

The important areas of environmental concern regarding

shrimp farming in the

State of Orissa are :

World Bank Aided Projects p

-Narendrapur, Bhadrak District

World Bank aided project comes within the national park area.

Therefore, it is desirable that this project proposal must be

dropped. It was also informed to the inspection team that

two

private shrimp farms are in operation at present

n,ear the proposed G

World Bank Aided Project which must be closed immediately, in

view of proximity of the national park

-Beidipur, Bhadrak District

There are plans to construct large shrimp farms.

It is necessary to H

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

894

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

mention that this area is profusely covered with wild sea weeds,

which has direct relationship with the ecology of the marine biota,

Keeping this aspect in view, a detailed EIA is required before

finalizing the development of shrimp farms in the area which must

include private farms in the region.

In addition, there is a salt dyke which prevents the flow of sea

water into

the agricultural lands. It is worth mentioning that more

than

50 shrimp farms, 1 ha. each have come up in this area, this

leads to conversion of fertile agricultural lands into brackishwater

based shrimp

farming resulting salinity, intrusion and desertifica­

tion of land.

-Jagatjore -Banapada, Kendrapara District

Construction

work of shrimp farni is in progress. Mechanised

systems for excavation, and construction are being used. In

addi­

tion, inhabitants are prosecuted. There is a signpost "Trespassers

will be prosecuted". It was informed to the inspection team by the

nearby villagers that this place was used for agriculture. Farmers,

fishermen, and cattle had free access to the nearby creeks. Now it

has been limited to a large extent. In addition, the inspection team

was informed about indiscriminate cutting of mangrove bushes

around

the area. This project must be reviewed critically keeping

Bhitar Kanika Wild Life Sanctuary in view.

Local entrepreneurs have started small shrimp farms of about 1

ha each. This will cause waterlogging problems in the area. Finally,

the high tide line (HTL) just touches the saline

dykt,. Therefore,

world Bank project proposal and other shrimp farms fall within

500 m of HTL, and do not conform to the MEFs notification dated

February

19, 1991.

• Chilka Lagoon

The silt carried by two main rivers, viz. Daya and Bhargabi gets

deposited in the lagoon. There is little exchange of water from the

sea because the mouth of the lagoon (35 km long) has been blocked

by three factors,viz.

H - silt

S. JAGANNAlH v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 895

-improper mixing, and A

-large clusters of shrimp farms hinder the passage of water into/out

of the lagoon.

The bird sanctuary at Nalaban has also been affected by siltation

and shrimp farming activities.

35 km of the canal month of the

lagoon needs immediate attention, because the exchange

of sea B

water into and from the lagoon is vital from ecological

considera­

tions. In addition, deposited silt has to be removed, shrimp farms

must

be closed down immediately to restore the Chi!ka lagoon, to

its original ecological condition by application of scientific

manage­

ment practices.

c

• Subarnarekha Mouth

A large number

of shrimp farms have come up on both sides of

the lower reaches of the Subarnarekha river to utilise the tidal

brackish water as observed

by the inspection team. It was reported D

to the inspection team by local people that this has resulted in

water logging in upper reaches of Subarnarekha river.

• The inspection team observed that the shrimp farming is at least

three times more than what has been presented by the State Govt

of Orissa.

• All the shrimp farms do not observe the MEF notification dated

February

19, 1991. The creek/estuarine water based shrimp farms

are also not observing the CRZ guidelines

of MEF.

E

Agricultural land is being converted to shrimp farming because of p

Land Reform Act of Govt. of

Orissa.

• Artificial creeks are being constructed to allow high tides of

creek/estuarine water into the large reservoir. In addition, this

factor must result in flooding of low lying areas.

• Reservoirs ·act as a setting cum concentration basin, therefore,

it

is necessary sometimes for the shrimp farmers to dilute this water

by withdrawing groundwater resulting in depletion

of groundwater

resources in the nearby villages. In addition, groundwater has

become saline.

This is confirmed by the situation in Adhuan village

G

in Bhadrak district. H

896

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

• The shrimp farming has resulted in several social problems viz.

-denial of free access to fishermen

-denial of job opportunities

-conversion of agricultural land to shrimp farming

-social displacement

-salination of groundwater

-reduction in grazing ground or cattle, and free access to creek/es-

tuarine water

• Wild shrimp seedling collection is still in practice. This will have

detrimental effect on the ecology of the sea, creek, and estuarine

waterbodies.

• Direct pumping from the creek/estuarine water system is being

practised. This results in reduction of fish catch and must be

stopped immediately.

• No shrimp farm had any type of wastewater and sediment

treatment systems including hatcheries.

• All hatcheries are located within 200 m of the HTL in con­

travance of the

MEFs notification dated February 19th, 1991. It

is necessary to stop the commissioning of all new hatcheries which

are not being constructed

as per CRZ regulations.

• Inttle points 'and wastewater discharge channels of the prawn

farms are nearby. This

is not a scientific water management of

shrimp farms.

• It has been observed by the inspection team that some shrimp

farms have barbed wires along the periphery of project site, e.g.

-Mis Deep Sun Culture Pvt. Ltd.

-Mis Surya Udyog Pvt. Ltd.

-M/s Manas Prawn Farm

Therefore, there

is no free access to creek and estuarine water

for the fishermen and cattle.

H 3.2 West Coast

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULD!P SINGH,J.) 897

* The shrimp farming activity in the west coast is mostly confmed A

to the traditional extensive type of fanning. Limited number of

commercial shrimp farms having areas more than

5 ha, working

on the semi-intensive type have been installed in the coastal areas

since last 3 years.

* Though in limited numbers, prawn farms working on the semi­

intensive type specifically in the

States of Karnataka, Maharashtra,

and Gujarat are situated within 500 m of high tide line of the sea,

which

is not in consonance with MEFs notification dated February

19, 1991.

* Incidence of conversion of agricultural land into coastal aquacul­

ture units, which infringes the fundamental right to file

and

livelihood, could be noticed in

States of Karnataka (Kumta taluk),

Maharashtra (Ratnagiri district, and Palghar taluk) and in Gujarat

(V alsad district).

* In States situated on the west coast of India brackish water

aquaculture units have been mainly installed along the estuaries

and river banks, where impounded backwater

is being used for

shrimp farming.

Such practices of extensive type of farming may

not have significant adverse impact on environment due to the fact

that limited quantities of brackish water are required for recharg­

ing these ponds, and the wasterwater generation is negligible.

However, this practice of utilisation of backwaters

will prove to

be unsound if carried out for large scale farms using semi-intensive

l}pe of farming.

* Villages situated along the sea coast, and backwater zones,

specifically at Gunda, Kumta and Karwar (Karnataka), Palghar

and Dahanu (Maharashtra), and Valsad (Gujarat) are under threat

due to conversion of land into aquaculture farms.

* In the State of Karnataka, the inspecting team observed that M/s

Murudeshwar Food and Export Ltd. prawn aquafarm units are

located within 100 m of HTL.

The intake and discharge points of

Mis Samudra Aquafams and

B

c

D

E

F

G

Mis Skyline Biotechnologies

Pvt. Ltd., Kagil, Kumta are very close H

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

898

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

to each other which may create problems of contamination in the

ponds. The prawns grown in these farms were reported to

be

affected by viral infection. Disposal of sediments from the ponds

was also observed to be carried out on the side of the river.

* It was also observed by the inspecting team in the State of

Karnataka that aquafarm of M/s Rajaram Bhat

Pvt. Ltd. at Hon­

nava in Kumta taluk has been installed on the periphery of the

village. The bunds constructed for making the ponds have

obstructed the free

flow of storm water, and domestic wastewater

from the village to sea and this has created health hazards for the

villagers. Intrusion

of saline water in the soil was also observed,

and reports on damage in coconut plantations in nearby areas were

also received. Contamination of drinking water sonrces due to

saline water intrusion

was observed.

* In the

State of Karnataka, M/s Agnasana Aquafarm Pvt. Ltd. has

come up adjacent to a school in village gunda, and the constructed

bund of the pond touches the compound of the school. Seepage

of Saline water from the bund and subsequent damage to the

foundation

of the school building, and damage to coconut plants

in nearby areas

was observed.

Such practices of allowing the ponds

to come up near residential and public utility places must

be

stopped inunediately.

* Coastal aquacultnre has resulted in loss of mangrove ecosystems

to a limited extent on the west coast. However, significant destruc­

tion of mangroves could be noticed in the coastal areas of districts

of Karwar & Kumta (Karnataka),

Palghar & Shrivardhan

(Maharashtra), and Valsad (Gujarat). Since the mangrove ecosys­

tems provide natnral habitat for spawning of marine biota, the

practice of indiscriminate destruction of mangrove ecosystem due

to installation

of shrimp must be stopped.

* No proper peripheral drainage has been provided around the

aquacultnre ponds following semi-intensive mode of farming in the

States of Kerala, Karnataka

& Maharashtra, and the waste water

from the ponds was observed to be discharged into the receiving

bodies without treatment.

S.JAGANNAIB V. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 899

* The brackish water intake and effluent discharge points for the A

ponds are located in close vicinity resulting in contamination of

feed water of the aquaculture units. The situation

is predominant

at Kumta (Karnataka),

Palghar (Maharashtra), and Valsad

(Gujarat), where a large number of medium and large aquafarms

have been installed.

• Since large number of medium and big farms have been installed

011 the coastal areas at places mentioned above, the wastewater

discharged into the creeks and back water zones

is not properly

flushed out during

low tide, thereby, affecting the intakes water

B

quality of aquaculture farms. C

• The situation in the State of Goa has not reached such an

alarmed situation

as yet due to limited number of farms, and

abundant quantities of backwater available in the riverine zones

of

Zuari and Mandavi rivers. However, future expansion of the

. shrimp farming practices warrant careful control in

view of tourism D

potential of the

State.

* Shrimp farming activity in the State of Gujarat is presently

confined to the coastal areas of Valsad, Bharuch, and Surat, two

large commercial shrimp farms are proposed to be installed in the

Jarnnagar district where salt farms are being operated currently.

Sanctions for ·such installations warrant careful consideration to

avoid damages to the

highly ecosensitive coral reef zones near this

coast.

E

The conclusions and recommendations as given in para 7 of the F

NEERI report are as under:-

"7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations on the attenuation of

adverse Impacts of Aquaculture Farming on Ecologically Fragile

Coastal Areas.

7.1 East Coast

• The shrimp farming activity in east coast in mostly confined to

G

the traditional and extensive mode. However, a large number of

commercial shrimp farms have started functioning on modified

extensive, semi-intensive; and intensive modes since last three years

H

900

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

• The large scale shrimp farms and hatcheries have violated CRZ

notification of MEF dated February 19, 1991 in the States of West

Bengal and Orissa.

* Incidence of conversion of agricultural land into coastal aquacul­

ture land into coastal aquaculture units which infringe upon the

fundamental rights to live and livelihood were noticed particularly

in the State of Orissa.

* It is desirable to establish aquaculture farms on modified exten­

sive mode. Semi-intensive and intensive mode of aquaculture must

not be adopted in the States of West Bengal and Orissa.

• Maintenance of quality of the feed, and stocking of healthy seed

from the government approved hatcheries associated with ap­

propriate water management practices warrants proper attention

in the prawn farming activities of the coastal areas.

* The proposed guidelines for shrimp farming in the State of West

Bengal do not address all Socio-economic, and ecological

siatu.<

of coastal habitats.

• The State of Orissa has not formulated any guidelines refated to

aquaculture practices.

•

* The cost of eco-restoration of the coastal fragile area must be

borne by the individual entrepreneurs of the commercial farms in

keeping with the polluter pays principle with specific reference to.

-Sunderban Mangrove/Littoral Forest, West Bengal

-Chilka Lagoon, Orissa

-Bhifar Kanika Wild Life Sanctuary, Orissa

-National Park, Orissa

-Subarnarekha Mouth, Orissa

No commercial coastal aquaculture activity should be under­

taken even beyond 500 m HTL unless a comprehensive and scien­

tific environmental impact assessment (EIA) study has been made

by the entrepreneur, and the environment management plan

(EMP) approved by the respective State Department of Environ­

ment, Pollution Control Board, and also by the MEF.

I

S.JAGANNATH v. U.O.l. [KULDIPSINGH,J.) 901

* Agricultural lands are being converted into commercial aquacul- A

ture, which causes unemployment to the landless labourers and

also in

loss of cultivable land.

* Grouodwater also gets contaminated due to seepage of im-

·

pounded water from aquaculture farms.

Due to commercial aquaculture farms, there

is a loss of :

-

mangrove ecosystem

-grazing grounds for cattle

-potable water to contiguous population

-fish catch

-agricultural produce

-economic loss due

to non-approachability of fishermen to

creek, estuary and sea directly

B

c

* The designs of the aquaculture farms are inadequate. No D

provision has been made for wastewater treatment facility enabling

recycling and re-use of wastewater in shrimp farms and hatcheries

to minimise water exchange.

In addition, there is a necessity to

treat deposited sediments from the shrimp farms. Sediments can

be converted into manure

for land application on or after proper

treatment

* Prohibition on conversion of agricultural land must be enforced

with immediate effect.

* Wild seed collection from creek, estuary, and sea must be

E

prohibited.

Seed must be procured from hatcheries. F

* An eco-restoration fund must be created by collecting the stipu­

lated fees from the owners of aquaculture farms. In addition, one

percent of total export earnings per annum must also be collected

from commercial aquaculture farm owners, and used fro rejuvena-

G

tion of coastal eco-system. The wastewater treatment system includ-

ing sediment control with reuse and recycle must be installed by all

units. The smaller units can for a co-operative, and treat water

through common effluent treatment plant. The aquaculture units

must be closed down if the wastewater treatment system including

sediment control

is not functioning to its design efficiency. H

902

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9S.C.R.

• A strict vigilance by the State Departments of Fisheries and

Pollution Control Board

is required to keep a check on pollution

abatement measures, it may be mentioned that even a small one

ha shrimp farm can be tailored to function on any mode of

production modified-extensive, semi, intensive, and intensive.

Therefore, strong control measures for production and pollution

(wastewater and sediments) are essential.

•Water (from sources such as creek, estuary or sea) cess must be

charged from the shrimp farm owners.

* Cultivable lands must not be converted for aquaculture. There

is a perceptible difference between cultivable and not cultivated

land. Thus, even

if aquaculturist buys agricultural land and keep

. them hallow for

say 2 or 3 years, that does not mean that the land

has become non-cultivable. Currently almost all the farms that exist

are cultivable lands except those in Midnapur district (7 aquafarms

in wastelands). Even those farmers

who do not sell their land to

prawn farm owners, are affected due to lack of drainage from

paddy fields which in turn cause flooding of the crop during rainy

season.

• The location of shrimp farms in Midnapur district on wasteland

developed

by the Department of Fisheries, Govt. of West Bengal

fulfills all scientific conditions except :

-

CRZ guidelines for creeks

-Wastewater

& sediment management practices, and

-Mode of operation which

is mostly semi-intensive and

intensive

•There are two commercial aquaculture units in the State of West

Bengal,

viz. Mis Sundarban Aquatic Farm Ltd., and Mis Index Port Ltd., which are violating CRZ regulations of MEF dated

February

19, 1991 as discussed hereunder.

-Mis Sundarban Aquatic Farms Ltd.: Conversion of agricultural

land

& traditional fish farm, and destruction of mangrove planta­

tion have taken place. In addition, this farm falls within

500 m from

HTL. Further,

CRZ regulations for location of aquaculture farm

......

....

..

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 903

near the creek have also been violated.

-Mis Index Port Ltd.; Conversion of agricultural land & traditional.

fish farm have been taken place. Groundwater has become saline

around the farm. Shrimp farms are not

well designed resulting in

seepage, Barbed wire fencing has restricted free access to farmers,

fishermen and cattle to the creek.

Jn addition, CRZ regulations

for location of aquaculture farm near the creek have also been

violated.

No treatment facilities have been provided by both the farms.

* It is necessary to review the World Bank aided projects and

commercial shrimp farms in and around Chilka Lagoon, keeping

in

view the MEF norms dated February 19, 1991 in the State of

Orissa, viz.

A

B

c

-Narendrapur project must be abandoned as it is within the D

National

Park. Also the existing commercial farms in operation

must be closed down.

-Bideipur project requires EIA studies. Several farms have

come up on the other side of the saline dyke which must also

be

included for evaluation in the EIA studies. E

-Jagatjaore-Banaspada project is within

500 m HTL, Farmers,

fishermen and cattle earlier had free access to the near by creek,

which has been limited to a great extent due to the commercial

shrimp farming activity. Also indiscriminate cutting of mangrove

F

bushes has been reported.

This project must, therefore, be reviewed critically keeping Bhitar

Kanika Wild Life Sanctuary in

view

• The commercial shrimp farms in Chilka Lagoon must be aban- G

doned keeping in view the ecological condition of the lagoon and

also the location of National Bird Sanctuary .

7.2 West Coast

• MEFs norms for location of aquaculture farms and hatcheries H

904

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

have been violated at many places in the States situated on west

coast of India.

' The current practice of installation of coastal aquaculture farms

within 500 m HTL violates the fundamental right and livelihood

of people in the coastal States

' The States of Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat have

neither formulated nor adopted

any guidelines in consonance with

CRZ-notification, Ministry of Environment

& Forests (MEF),

Govt. of India for scientific control and management of the shrimp

farms in the respective

States. These States must formulate and

adopt legislative Acts for proper management and regulation of

existing shrimp farms in the respective States.

'The State Government of Goa has enacted a bill dated November

17, 1994 in order to regulate, promote and manage the shrimp

farms in this State, in a scientific manner. However, this bill is not

in consonance with the

MEF notification dated February 19, 1991

as it allows the construction of aquaculture units within

500 m of

HTL of the sea. The bill

is limited to the guidelines pertaining to

the allotment of lands for the entrepreneurs.

' The cost of eco-restoration of the coastal fragile area must

be

borne by the individual entrepreneur of the commercial aquacul­

ture farms in keeping with the polluter pays principle

* No commercial coastal aquaculture activity should be under­

taken even beyond

500 m HTL unless a comprehensive and scien­

tific environmental impact assessment (BIA) study has been

conducted

by the entrepreneur, and the environment management

plan

(EMP) approved by the respective State Department of

Environment Pollution Control Board, Shore Development

Authority, and also by the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

' Commercial aquaculture farms are planned to

be installed near

the cultivated lands in all the

States of west coast. Salt water from

the farms results in damage to the productivity of the adjoining

lands.

H ' Groundwater also gets contaminated due to seepage of im-

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 905,

pounded water from the aquaculture ponds.

• Desertification of cultivable land can result in increased saline

intrusion on west coast.

Due to commercial aquaculture farms, there is a loss

of :

-mangrove ecosystems

-casuarina plantations

-grazing grounds for cattle

-potable water to contiguous population

-fish catch

-fishing nets

-agricultural produce

-economic loss due to non-approachability

of fishermen to

sea shore directly

A

B

c

• The designs of the aquaculture farms are inadequate. No D

provision has been made for wastewater treatment facility enabling

recycling and re-use

of wastewater.

* Prohibition on conversion of agricultural lands and salt farms

into commercial aquaculture farms must be enforced with the

immediate effect. E

• Wild seed collection from creek and sea must be prohibited.

Seed must be procured from hatcheries.

• An eco-restoration fund must be created by collecting the stipu­

lated fees from the owners of aquaculture farms. In addition, one F

percent

of total export earnings per annum must also be collected

from commercial aquaculture farm owners and used for rejuvena-

tion of coastal eco-system with special reference to plantation

of

mangroves and common eco-sensitive zones. The wastewater

treat­

ment system with reuse and recycle must be installed by all units. G

The smaller units can form a co-operative and treat their water

through common effluent treatment plant. The aquaculture

units

must be closed down if the wastewater treatment system is not

functioning to its design efficiency.

• Drainage canals must be constructed around the existing ponds H

A

B

906 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

to collect seepage from the pond which will prevent the intrusion

of saline water into the adjoining agricultural fields

& residential

areas. The design and construction of the drainage canal/bund

must be undertaken scientifically based on the topographical fea­

tures of the area. This

will avoid the flooding of the' area with saline

water, and

will help in restoration of hygienic sanitary conditions

in the nearby residential areas.

The

two NEERI reports clearly indicate that due to commercial acqua-cul­

ture farming there

is considerable degradation of the mangrove eco-sys­

tems, depletion or Casuarina plantations, pollution of potable waters,

C reduction in fish catch, and blockage of direct approach to the sea-shore.

Agriculture lands and salt farms are being

converted into commercial

acqua-culture farms. The ground water has got contaminated due to

seepage of impounded water from the acqua-culture farms. Highly pol­

luted effluents are discharged

by the shrimp-farms into the sea and on the

D sea-coast.

A report titled "Expert Committee Report on Impact of

Shrimp

Farms Along The Coast of Tamil Nadu and Pondichcrry" has been placed

on the record. Justice H. Suresh, a retired Judge of Bombay High Court,

Dr. A. Sreenivasan, Joint Director of Fisheries (retd.), Dr. A.G.K. Menon, .

E an Ichthyologist, Mr. V. Karuppan IA.S. (retd.), Dr. M. Arunachalam,

Lecturer, Centre for Environmental Sciences, Manommaniam Sundaranar

University, Tamil Nadu and Dr.

K. Dakshinamoorthy, a Medical

Surgeon

constituted the "expert committee" (Suresh Committee). Although the

investigation

by the

Suresh Committee was done at the instance of "com-

p plaint against shrimp industries" but keeping in view the status of the

committee members and the Factual Data collected and relied upon

by the

committee it would

be useful to examine the same. The

Suresh Committee

visited various villages in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry and gave its findings

based on the evidence collected

by the Committee.

Some of the findings

of Suresh Committee are as under :-

G

"The farmers of Perunthottam told us that they have sold nearly

140 acres of their own lands to the Bask company and 40 acres

to the Bismi company. Evidence was also given to

us showing in

the lands purchased

by Bask Farms, where three or two crops were

H being cultivated. It also revealed that the percentage of yield was

S.JAGANNA1B v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.]

as much as 60%. Details regarding this are found in Annexure 15. A

The Bismi company has erected a pipe line till the boundary of

the farm for draining sea water.

It is yet to be connected to the

sea.

The Bask company

is situated at a distance of

150 m from the

scheduled caste households. Bask Aqua Farm

is situated within B 600 m from the sea and the distance of Bismi Aqua farms is just

25 m from the sea. During our visit, we found Bask farms engaged

in construction of Prawn farms on agricultural lands that had been

purchased (Photo No. 23 & 24) .... Representative of Perunthottam

village also shared before the Expert team that the yield obtained

C

from the fields adjacent to prawn farms were affected. Moreover

the villagers have lost their access to potable water as the water

tables have become alkaline due to the seepage of sea water from

the prawn farms. Bask farms have been using ground water for

nearly

two years crop. The Managing Director confirmed this D

before the Expert

team."

The Committee visited Pichavaram Vedaranyam on July 13th/15th, 1995

and observed as under :-

"It was observed that the palmyrah trees in this area which is the E

most drought resistant tree has dried after the onset of prawn farms

in

this area. Majority of the coconut trees have dried up and few

remaining have stopped yielding fruits.

The unanimous opinion of the people

is that most of the F

mangrove species are on the decline. These mangroves serve as a

source of the fuel wood for domestic purposes, grazing ground for

animals, water-way for locals and tourists and an important habitat

for fisheries increasingly polluted because of the effluent

dis­

charged by the shrimp farms. They also brought to our notice the

greater value of the mangrove

as a stabliser of the coast and how, G

because of this being disturbed

by the destruction of the palmyrah,

coconut and casuaring grooves, coastal erosion has become com­

mon.11

Regarding visit to Pudhupetti, the Committee stated as under :- H

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

908

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

"We visited Pudhupettai on 14th July in order to get a first hand

knowledge about the impact of Farisa Aqua Farm details of which

was narrated by the Pudhupettai representative to the expert team

on 13th July at Nagai. We saw the pucca construction of the Farisa

farm's J etti into the sea

to enable the pumping of the sea water.

This

clearly is acting as a hindrance for the free mobility of the

fishing community and their access to sea and land .... All these

three farms are situated within

25 m from the sea. Further these

farms are

closely situated to the dwelling houses also. Coastal

Enterprises is situated at a distance of 20 m, the Farisha Aqua

farm at a distance of

250 m and

Blue Base Aqua farm at 20 m

from the dwellings of Perumalpettai the next fishing village from

Pudupettain there is a fourth enterprise namely Abhirami Aqua

farms which

owns about 150 acres of wet

land has not commenced

work

as yet. ......

Pipes have been laid to discharge effluent either

to the sea, or adjoining

dry lands

belonging to the village or to the

water channel used

by villages for bathing. Effluent is

also being

discharged close to the dwelling houses. In particular, "effluent is

being collected right in front of my house" said Kalvikarasi a

resident of Pudhupettai village who made a representation to the

Expert team on July 13th. She said that "Drinking water in the

village

is now turning

salty" ........ The advantages of shore seine net

fishing is the abundant catch

of

"Anchovy'' fish which has commer­

cially viable market. The construction of permanent jetties has

eliminated the 'shore seine net fishing. Shore seine net fishing

needs uninterrupted coastline and it has become an impossibility

in Pudupettai. About 10 shore seine nets are idle in the village.

The construction of pipe to discharge effluent

is a permanent one.

By construction of the permanent jetties, the

natural sand dunes

in the village were destroyed. These sand dunes are a natural

cyclone barriers. Hence a threat of cyclone is imminent since these

natural cyclone barriers are destroye.d.

The construction of pipelines ending in the sea for pumping in

sea water has damaged nearly 10 nets worth Rs. 60,000. Details of

nets damaged

is given in Annexure 19. The

Coastal E.nterprises

Ltd. has encroached the burial ground of Pudupettai and Blue

Base Aqua Farms has encroached the burial ground of Perumal­

pettai.

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.O.I. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 909

The Committee visited the Pullicat lake area on July 10, 1995. The findings A

of the Committee are as under :-

"Ecologically the Tamilnadu part of the Pulicat lake is important

since it has the only opening of the lake into the sea thus function-

ing

as the migratory route of these spawn animals like prawns, fish B

and mud crabs. The mud flats of pulicat lake harbours a number

of winter migratory birds. We were told that the water

fowl

sanctuary at Pulicat is slowly being destroyed .... We observed that

Prawn farms are located all around the wetland. In the northern

region of the lake prawn farms are situated even in the lake-bed.

Maheshwari Export India Ltd.

is constructing a

Prawn Farm across C

the Pollica! lake bed clearly violative of the Tamilnadu Aqua

Culture Regulation Act. We also noticed water being pumped out

from the lake into the Prawn farms.

According to Dr. Sanjeeva Raj, Pulicat lake has

two bird D

sanctuaries namely Yedurapettu and Nelapattu. It is estimated that

nearly

10-15 thousand of flamingoes and other rare birds visit the

Pulicat lake for four months only for feeding all the

way from Rann

of Kutch.

Other water birds like pelicans, Cormorants, Egrets and

Herons breed at Nelapattu and feed at this Pulicat lake.

At

Yedurapattu, Painted

Storks, Pelicans, and Open Bills also feed E

here. In 1993 it was estimated that there was 10000 to 15000

Flamingoes. By 1994 this has been reduced to less than 1000. The

reason for this can be attributed to the effluent from prawn farms

which kills the organisms

on which the Flamingoes feed. The

depletion of natural feed could have caused this reduction ....... The

F

Tamilnadu forest Department is establishing a third sanctuary in

the southern tip of Pulicat lake. We were told that due to the noise

of oil engines, bulldozers and other disturbances by the prawn

farms many birds especially painted stork's have deserted

this lake.

Dr. Sanjeeva Raj also states that Pulicat

is ecologically very

sensitive and fragile. The east coast

is vulnerable to cyclones. With

the hundreds of prawn farms along the coast excavating sand along

the coast line every possibility .existed for inviting the sea to enter

·G

and destroy the water table. Further, prawn farms destroys sand

dunes and vegetations and in times of tidal waves sea water could

H

910

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

enter in a big way.

Further, Dr. Sanjeeva Raj said that Pulicat lake is fairly shallow

with an average depth of about

1.5 m. It can be described as a

Saucer. The pumping of water

by aquafarms will result in an

artificial drying up of the lake. Added to

this the road, from

Sulurpet that has been constructed for reaching the Shriharikotta

rocket launching site through the lake has obstructed free flow of

water.

It is generally claimed by the prawn farm owners that the

land on the eastern side of the road

is not the part of

Pulicat lake

and hence prawn farms can

be constructed. This is false as all this

land area

is part of the

Pulicat lake. The tragedy is that if prawn

farms are erected on the higher side of the lake, the effluent from

the prawn farms

will flow back into the lake causing serious

damage to marine and estuarine biota ........

Pasipuram Rajiv Gandi

N agar has a dalit hamlet Edamani, This hamlet had a water tank

which provided water to the nearly 35 villages. The source of water

was the village ground water. But due to the impact of the adjoining

farm the water became saline making it unsuitable for consump­

tion.

An eminent danger by the prawn companies is to the village

called Jamila badb. This village has

150 muslim families (fisher).

They were originally living in the land on which the Shriharikotta

Space Research Station is built. These families were relocated by

the Government promising jobs and providing free housing site

near the Pulicat lake. They built their own huts at the cost of Rs.

3000 each. These huts today face serious flood threat since on both

sides of the village two prawn enterprises have obstructed the

Ponneri lake water to flow in to the sea. This obstruction due to

the construction of prawn farms floods the village. From

1991 till

date every year water reaches the boundary of the village and

before it could enter inside nearly

2000 village people manually

divert the water to the sea, though the village people have made

representation and protested to the owners, they use their

economic and political power to scare the fishing people and make

them

live in a permanent state of fear.

People also told us that

they are affected

by itching, scabies, and fever which could be due

to the discharge of effluent."

-

'.

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KULDJPSINGH,J.] 911

The Committees' observation regarding Karaikal district Pondicherry are A

as under:-

"As quoted by the Pondichery Science Forum, :"Karaikal region

has only 20 kms of coastal stretch. This coastal stretch is of

environmental significance

as the area and its environs have creeks

and lagoons, beaches with dunes, coastal plains, natural reeves,

flood plain and

is also the tail end of the Cauvery river basin.

Karaikal

is considered as the granary of Pondicherry and has main

irrigation canals like Nini kattalai

Pidari Kartalai and

Arasapuram!T.

B

• c

The ground water reserves of Karaikal is frightfully meagre but

for the only sweet water aquifer at about 10 to 20 ft. deep there is

no other potable aquifer. This water source cannot be exploited

continuously since it takes time to recharge and poses danger of

sea water intrusion. Only manual hand pumps are being used to

tap this water

at present. D

It

is in this context Karaikal is posed with the serious danger

of loosing this sweet water acquifer

as most of the small prawn

farms are in the process deriving water during the high tides from

the rivers like Mullaiyar, Thirumalairayananar, Arasalar Nandalar E

and Pravidayanar and also used ground water for Shrimp culture.

This continuous withdrawal of fresh water

will alter surface water

resources.

So, there is no possibility for the recharging mechanisms

as the wet lands

near these river basins are converted to

aquafarms and these wet lands have lost their function of absorbing

rain water and recharging the aquifer

zones."

The conclusions reached by the Suresh Committee under various headings

indicating the impact of shrimp culture farming on environment are

reproduced hereunder

:-"(a) Effluent Pollution

F

G

As Shrimp Culture using high protein feeds is a highly polluting

activity. Presently 78,000 tonnes feed is used in India in Shrimp

Culture. This

is bio-degradable, if properly treated. It leaves be­

hind responded solids (organic) and the decomposition liberates H

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

912

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

inorganic N and P. 77.5% of N and 86% of P from the feed are

worked and enter the pond environment. 1 ton of P. monodon

production results in a pollution load of 56.3-48.1 Kg N and

13.0-24.4

Kg P. (Phillips et al 1993. ICLARM. Conf. Proc 31171

198).

Excess amount of P and N are detrimental to environment

(Rurnseg 1994 SACMONID

XVII (4) : 10-14). These lead to

"hyper eutrophication" resulting in massive algal blooms and

oxygen depletion which are harmful to aquatic life, these blooms

such

as

"Red tide" cause fish mortality. The effluent quality during

harvesting the shrimp pond

is: total nitrogen

1900-261'10 ppm, total

0 40-110 PPM and organic carbon 7.3-13.7 ppm. The impact of

this

is the reduced oxygen, hyper nitrification, alteration or com­

munity structure, sedinextation changes in besithic communities

etc

(Phillips et al 1993).

Further "Self Pollution" results from feed wasted, which be­

comes unmanageable (imre Csavas

1994. Shrimp News Interna­

tional March-April 1994), Organic wastes, solid matter, dissolved

metabolites

like ammonia, Carbon-dioxide are produced. Decom-

posing organic matter depletes

oxygen from water. Admittedly

being biodegradable the effluents consume oxygen and

so denude

the water of its

oxygen. When there is oxygen deficit, fish avoid

such

low oxygen zones and move further away to oxygen saturated

zones and when there

is oxygen depletion fish die en-masse.

Fishing village near whose coast shrimp ponds have come up -Fish

have become scarce and the artisanal fisherman have to go further

away from shore to catch fish. Population of fish and their diversity

decrease.

.. .... With regard to farm effluents being treated and

discharged into the sea and other water bodies. We did not see

or hear about any such scientific process of effluent treatment

having been set up

by prawn farms. In M/s Bask farms we were

shown

two partially dry sedimentation tanks. We saw untreated

effluents from M/s Amalgam shrimp farm being discharged into

the beach (not even into the sea) causing degradation of the beach

shore with dark brown,

foul smelling organic matter, which is a

health hazard. The Joint Director, MPEDA itself has stated that

H 'most of the farms .have not set up effluent treatment systems.

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.]

(b) Salinisation

913

The dominant species of Shrimp cultured is Penaeus monodon

the tiger prawn and next comes the white prawn, P. indicus. Both

are marine prawns. P. monodon grows best at salinities of 10-20

A

p.pt (20% but tolerate slightly higher or lower salinities. P. indicus B

requires higher salinity 20-30 ppi. Thus seawater is the primary

medium of growth. Seawater or salinity 35-36 ppt

is taken into the

ponds. The growing period ranges from 120-150 days.

Sea water

is periodically replaced Sea water remaining in the pond for a long

period seeps into neighbouring areas where agriculture

is practiced

and salinizes the soils which therefore lose their productivity for

C

crops and become unfit for agriculture. Even assuring that the

500

m zonation is enforced it will not solve the problem of salination.

Agriculture lands, inwards (towards inland) of shrimp ponds

will

become saline and the chain reaction will continue ..... Many shrimp

industries assert that they are taking only sea water for shrimp

D

culture and do not use ground water.

Sea water has a salinity

around

35 ppt. It is mostly

Penaeus monodon the tiger shrimp.

This needs a salinity in the range of

15-20 ppt for optimum growth. So the shrimp producer have necessarily to dilute it to bring down

the salinity by adding fresh water. Let along ground water,

we have

even seen river water being pumped near

Poompuhar into to E

shrimp ponds ...... Salinization is not only possible but has actually

happened all over the world. The Bhagwathi institute of Environ­

ment and Development, analysed numerous samples of water

adjacent to shrimp farms in Sirkali Taluk, TN, and found that in

most of them Chlorides exceeded the permitted limits even by over

F 100 times for eg. 15265 mgil in drinking water source near

Suryakumar Shrimp to Mahendrapalle. In Kurru village, Nellore

District, drinking water became saline after four shrimp farms were

established and BUD people of this village had no drinking water

(Vandana Shiva 1994, "Social and Environmental impact of

Aquaculture). Dr. Alagarswami, Director CIBA identifies Saliniza- G

lion of drinking water, wells, dwelling units adjoining agriculture

lands and aquifers

as critical issues in shrimp culture. (National

Workshop on Transfer of Technology for sustainable shrimp Farm-

ing, Ms. Swaminathan Foundation Madras, January

9-10, 1995) D~.

V. Gopalakrishnan, former FAQ expert says "salt water seepage H

914

A

B

c

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

problem appears to

be genuine and such area should be avoided

for establishing new shrimp

farms" (Fish & Fisheries, Newsletter,

No 4 January 1995). Dr. Sanjeevaraj noted that in Pulicat lake,

saltwater from Prawn ponds was known to be seeping into drinking

water tables (CUPDANET NEWSLETTER Winter 1994) ........ We

have noted the salinization of drinking water in Pudukuppam,

Naicker Kuppam, Poompuhar, Perunthottam, Pudupet, etc in

Sirkali Taluk caused

by large shrimp units and also in a very acute

manner in

Pattinamarudur, Tuticorin, VOC district which is

sandwitched between two large farms viz. ITC and MAC Aqua

farms Ltd.

(c) Feed and wastes

In a moderate 3

t/ha yield of shrimp, 4-6 t/ha feed is applied

while for a yield of St/ha it is 15!/ha. The magnitude of pulTeseible

D organic matter from these wastes is enormous. Hence, the practice

of discharging such effluents into common water bodies needs to

be strongly discouraged because of the strongly polluting effect

(Mackintosh, D.J. INFOFISH. International 6/92, 38-41). Feed

wastes are more toxic than sewage and

this is a sufficient ground

E

F

G

H

for banning industrial Shrimp Cultnre, ..... The Team found that

Amalgam marine Harvests, was blatantly

dischwging the effluents

into the foreshore naJTow sandy breach at Pudukuppam. This has

spoiled the aesthetic appearance of the breach.

The area is dark

brown in colour and foul smelling. This will pose a serious hazard

to Public Health. The wastes also enter

"Uppanar" stream hardly 5

m away from discharge point. This is illegal and affects the health

of villages. Settleable solids silt up the ponds and canals.

Over

accumulation of detritus leads to profusion of protozoa, and

ciliates, which cover the body of

fish. Respiratory diseases, loss of

appetite, black

gill disease, shell disease, foul smell of internal

parts, tail rot etc are caused

by such unhealthy pond conditions.

The quality 9f effluents discharged into the environment are so

poor that biological methods

will not be sufficient to treat them.

Most of the environmental troubles are caused

by the industrial

shrimp. The coastal zone used for culturing aquatic organisms is

only a narrow strip on the continental shell and on the

low lying

flatlands. Hence the very fragile natnre of the coastal ecosystem

is

"-"----.

S. JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 915

getting destroyed. A

( d) Fertilizers and therapeutants

Large quantities of feeds are being used and fertilizer applica­

tions are generally minimal. Lime is regularly used but continued

use of lime impoverished the soil.

It also hardens the soil. B

However, it is the use of therapeutants that this highly destruc-

tive of the environment. A very incisive account of the use of drugs

in acquaculture

is available from

P. de. Kinkle in and C. Michael

(INFOFISL International 4/92: 45-46 1992) and an exhaustive C

report is provided by Fred P. Meyer, an authority on the subject.

(Review in Aquaculture sciences Ve 1(4):693-710

1989). However

the

use of drugs has only aggravated the damage to environment.

Sulpha drugs, Tetracyclines Quinolones, Nitrofurans, macrolids

(for

eg. erythromycin), Chloramphenicol, and dozens of similar

drugs are in use. Organophosphorus compounds like Dichlorvas

D

are also used. Formalin, malachite green copper sulphate, quater­

nary ammonium compounds, lodophores, chloramine-T etc., are

used as sanitizers.

Viruses cannot be treated by any of the drugs. Renibacterinm E

sp is also resistant to drugs. Chemotherapy leads to transit of drugs

and their long persistence. Rebase of drugs or their metabolites

into the environment affects the non-target organisms.

Use of

steroids (Di-dehyl stilboestrol;

to fatten shrimp in ponds has car-.

cinogenic effect on humans.

Use of chloramphenicol has unpre­

dictable risks for

human beings. Effluent treatment and F

self-recovery are hampered by the drugs by suppressing

saprophytic bacteria involved in purification processes.

Soils ac­

cumulate drug residues.

(e)

[,ass of Mangroves and Biodiversity

G

We observed that removal or destruction of these important

mangrove habitats for establishing shrimp farms

is becoming in­

creasingly common along the coast of Tamilnadu. From the Photographs (No. 40-45 showing the destruction of mangroves­

bunds are already built),

it is evident that there are several shrimp H

916

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

farms on the banks of Pitchavaram Mangrove forests a valuable

habitat. For the farms, water intake from the habitat will lead to

virtual dryness of the habitat and the loss of biodiversity in this

valuable realm.

It is evident that the consequences are felt by the

existing farms (Palmyarh and coconut trees in nearby farms are

withering -Photograph

No. 46 & 47). The destruction of the

mangroves

(Photo No. 40-42) for shrimp farm will be a major cause

for the loss of habitat diversity along the coastline of Tamilnadu.

We are going to lose a valuable gene pool and thus conservation

of mangrove genetic resources from the activities of shrimp in­

dustry

is a matter of primary urgency.

(f) Loss of Biodiversity in

Cauvery flood plain and delta

The stagnation in water of this lower reaches is due to the illegal

damming at several places along the course and the obstruction of

feeder canals ad distributors to the main river. Once considered a

best estuary and the delta of canvery are now vanished (Photo

No.

48 showing the ill fated Cauvery). Also in the lower reaches in

Nagai district, Tamilnadu,low land drains regulator has

been used

for their effluent release

(Photo No. 49) showing the block and the

P.W.D. feeder canals are either blocked by the farm owners or

using

as drainage for effluent release by Amalgam Marine Harvests

Ltd. at Pudhukkuppam

(Photo No. 50) from the farms. These

canals and drains once used

as a freshwater resource for bathing

and rechargers for the wells for the fisher folk in several villages

now become saline because of the cessation of flow (example :

Pudukuppam village of

Sirkali Taluk district; Pudapettal village

Tharangampadi Taluk. .

..

Seed collection of Peneaus monodon

(tiger prawn) by children

is a regular practice in these canals now.

During their collection of seeds the children picked only the tiger

prawn seeds and threw

away all other shrimp and fish seeds, thus

depleting the estuarine and coastal fishery resources.

One child

get paise

0.10 for the tiger prawn seed and one earns about Rupees

one hundred (Rs. 100 per day and 40-50 children are engaged in

seed collection). This involves child labour and depletion of fishery

resources and the loss of biodiversity in coastal and deltaic regions

of Cauvery. Nursery grounds for shell and

fin fishes are Jost in this

H ancient river delta.

S. JAGANNATH v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 917

(g) Threatened Wetlands of National and Intemational Importance A

The marshy swamps of V edaranyam are now as threatened

habitats with the formation of shrimp culture all along the brackish

water zones and in the marshy swamps ..... .Another wet land of

national importance, which

is being threatened is Pulicat lake.

Report A

(1992) by the Ministry of Environment and Forests,

Government of India clearly stressed the need of conserving these

wetlands of national importance. . . .In the Government of India

Report Pulicat Lake has been identified

as an important lagoon

B

c

(p.8 of the Report). This fragile ecosystem has been under great

threat by the industrial shrimp farming. In the main brackish water

area, construction ofbunds

is going on (Photo No. 55 to 66). From

the photographs it

is evident that the marshy lands with its typical

marshy vegetation

is the only area left and almost all the marshy

areas are being lost because of the upcoming shrimp culture ponds.

These areas of marshy vegetation act

as spawning/nursery grounds

for a variety of estuarine/marine in vertebrates, and

fisl).es. These D

areas also provide wildlife habitats to several migrant birds.

(h) Impact on agriculture

Dr. Alagarswami, Director CIBA identifies "indiscriminate E

conversion of agricultural lands into shrimp culture" as a critical

issue. Most shrimp farmers

in coastal

areas-have converted agricul­

tural lands into shrimp ponds. More relevant

is the fact that shrimp

industry

puses salinisation of crop lands. Seawater (Salinity

around

35 ppt i.e. 35%) is pumped into the shrimp ponds. The

growing period

is from

120-150 days. This long detention of saline F

water in the shrimp ponds seeps into the adjacent crop lands and

salinizes them resulting in reduction or productivity or even bar­

renness. Then this "Unproductive" land (so declared by the shrimp

industries)

is converted into shrimp ponds.

We are concerned that conversion of paddy fields to shrimp G

ponds is already adversely affecting local rice production. In all

the places

we visited in NQM district Pattinamarudur of Tuticorin,

Pulicat of Chengai MGR districts Etc; most of the shrimp ponds

are constructed on fertile agricultural land or on marginal lands

where on crop

is raised. Owing to the recent shortage of Cauvery H

918

A

B

c

SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

water (dispute between T.N. and Karnataka). The yield of crops

has been affected. Taking advantage of this, Shrimp industries have

been buying up agricultural land through inducement, persuasion

and high pressure on revenue authorities. Salinization of soil and

water adjoining the shrimp farms

is very well documented for

Perunthottam village. As per the cultivation record for land pur­

chased

by Mis Bask farms we see clearly that the lands purchased

were fertile agricultural lands with an average of

two crops having

a

60% harvest yield.

(i) Denial of potable water

"Nagai, Q.M. districts of Tamilnadu, the erstwhile granary of

South'',

is today threatened with pollution, ecological imbalance

aud land alienation because of the arrival of large number of

private companies and transnational corporations that have been

D investing heavily in shrimp farms etc (Mukul Sharma: Interpress

service November

11, 1994). Drinking water in the vicinity of

shrimp farms has become saline, wherever such farms were

operated. Shrimp culture

may increase salinity through facilitating

the

flow of saline water inland and discharge of saline effluent

E

F

G

H

(Philips Kwei Lin and Beveridge 1993.) Water samples from 7

villages in Sirkazhi near the shrimp farms

were_ analysed by Bhag­

wathi Environment Development Institute at Dindigul.

It was

found that the water from bore wells and hand pumps were

unpotable (see Annexure)

·the villages directed were

Mahendrapatti, Neithavasal, Pudukuppam, Eranyimedu,

Keelaiyur, Thirunagari, Nirajimedu etc. This was also confirmed

by the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh in Kurru village. Nellore Dt

where all the freshwater wells became saline and unpotable after

4 shrimp farms were established. The proof of this

was the fast

that the District Collector, Nellore ordered the supply of drinking

water through tankers,

to these villagers. Dr. P. Sanjeev Raj

(COP­

DANET NEWS LETTER winter 1994) also found that salt water

from shrimp ponds seeped into drinking water sources. Dr. van­

dana

Shiva, after visiting some villages recorded that

"shortage of

drinking water and deterioration of its quality have resulted in the

neighbourhood of shrimp farms".

'

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KUI.DIP SINGH,J.] 919

Protection of ground water sources may be viewed as non-A

tradeable capital, as once contaminated, they may prove impossible

to rehabilitate {Mark Evarard 1994).

As per the study done

by BED!, Water sample from a drinking

water

well in Naikarkupparn had a

IDS of 2164 mg/1 and a B

chloride content of 993 mg/1 in addition to excessive quantities of

Mg and Ca. Samples collected from a drinking water hand pump

near Shriram Shrimp farm now Amalgam farms had an exceedingly

high TDS of 357/Sm g/1, hardness of 7506 mg/I which is as bad as

seawater. Unacceptably high Ca, Mg and sulphate were recorded.

Another hand pump near the same farm had a TDS of 1466 mg/ C

and a chloride content of 656 ppm which are unpotable.

Drinking water from a handpump near the shrimp farm of

Coastal Enterprises Ltd had a TDS of 7694, chloride of 3879,

hardness of 24/0 mg/I and so was unpotable." D

The three reports discussed above give a rather depressing scenario

of the shrimp industry. While the production increases and export earnings

of the industry are

well publicised, the socio-economic losses and environ­

mental degradation affecting the well-being of coastal population are hard-

E

ly noticed. The traditional production systems are being replaced by more

intensive ones. This has been encouraged by increasing demand from high

income countries.

Shrimp yield per hectare in many areas increased within

a

few years from an average

100 kg/ha per harvest to an average of 1000

kg/ha/crop for semi-intensive shrimp farms and to between 2000 and 10000

kg/ha/crop for intensive type of production. The social and environmental F

costs of the expanding shrimp industry are closely inter-related. Pollution

and other types of natural resource degradation induced by shrimp farming

have been considerably, highlighted in the NEERI reports and other

material quoted and discussed by

us.

Social and environmental changes,

resulting from expanding shrimp industry in coastal areas are largely due

to the conversion into shrimp farms or the lands, waters and forests which

G

were earlier dedicated to other uses. In fact, shrimp farms are developing

at the expense of other agriculture, acquaculture, forest uses and fisheries

that are better suited in many places for meeting local food and employ­

ment requirements. Intensive and semi-intensive types of shrimp produc-

tion hardly seem to meet these requirements. H

920 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A Mangrove forests constitute an important component of coastal eco-

systems. They thrive in tidle estuaries, salt marshes

and muddy coast lines.

Conversion of mangrove to shrimp farms significantly reduces the natural

production

of wild capture shrimp as well as other fisheries. Moreover,

their production role for low-lying coastal regions

is rapidly diminishing by

B their replacement by shrimp ponds. The Sunder Bans, which constitute one

of the biggest mangrove areas in the world, covered in the early

1990s about

12000 sq kms. in India and Bangladesh. In the West Bengal part of Sunder

Bans large mangrove areas have been replaced by the shrimp ponds.

The increasing need for land by shrimp entrepreneurs has meant a

C dramatic rise in land prices in many areas. After the installation of shrimp

farms near village lands, prices rise estronomically.

Local farmers can no

longer afford to purchase land, while indebted farmers are tempted

to sell

their holdings. Much of the coastal land recently converted into shrimp

farms was previously used for food crops and traditional fishing.

D The

United Nations Research institute for Social Development in

collaboration with the World Wide Fund for Nature International has

conducted a study and published a report dated June

19, 1995 called

"Some

Ecological and Social implications of Commercial Shrimp Farming in

Asia". The report

is prepared by Solon Barraclong and Andrea Finger -

E Stich (the

UN Report).

F

G

H

The UN Report gives the following picture regarding polluted waters

and depleted fisheries

:-

"Polluted waters and depleted fisheries; Shrimp farms use both sea

and fresh water to replenish their ponds. This brings them into

competition with other users of these water resources.

In areas

where commercial shrimp ponds have been constructed there

is

frequently insufficient fresh water left to meet customary needs for

irrigation, drinking, washing,

or other household and livestock

related uses, and water supplies may

be contaminated, or both.

Groundwater Salinization has been reported in several places. This

often means that people -most

of the time women -have to

bring

water from more distant wells, in a village in Tamil Nadu (Nagai­

Quaio-e-Millet district, Pompuhar region), for example, women

have to walk two to three kilometers to fetch drinking water that

previously was available nearby before the expansion of shrimp

S.JAGANNATII v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 921

farms on about 10,000 hectares (Bhagat, 1994). In Andhra Pradesh, A

a case study conducted by Vandana Shiva reports that,in the

Nell ore district, there was no drinking water available for the 600

fisherfolk of the village of Kurru due to aquaculture farms saliniz-

ing groundwater. She adds that "after protest from the local

women, drinking water was supplied in tankers" (Mukul, 1994)

.... Local stocks of native fish and crustaceans are being depleted

in many places because of the removal of mangroves which served

as nurserybeds, and also as a result of indiscriminate overfishing

of

wild shrimp fry (over

90 per cent of randomly caught fry are

often wasted [Gujja, 1994]). Natural fisheries are also frequently

damaged by pollution caused by overloads of nutrients, sediments

B

c

and chemicals from shrimp farms. In another Indian coastal village,

Ramachandrapurarn, fishermen reported that the value of their

average catch of shrimp used to be Rs.

50,000 per catamaran per

month, but after one year of operation of nearby aquafarms their

catch

was ten times smaller (Mukul, 1994). In the Chokoria part D

of the Sundarbans of Bangladesh, fishermen report an

80 percent

drop in fish capture since the destruction of the mangroves and

building of dikes for shrimp farming (Sultna, 1994). Frequently,

fisherfolk protest because their traditional access to the coast has

been restricted or because stocks of wild crustaceans and fish have

disappeared.

E

All the reports referred to by us clearly indicate that the expansion

of modern shrimp ponds in the coastal areas has meant that local fishermen

could only reach the beach by trespassing at great risk on shrimp farms or

by taking a log detour. Local people have not only lost access to their

F

fishing grounds and to their sources of riverine seafoods and seaweeds, but

they also have to relinquish social and recreational activities traditionally

taking place on their beaches. The

UN Report gives the following picture

regarding natural resource degradation

as a result of shrimp farming :-

"In areas densely covered with intensive shrimp farms, however, G

the industry is responsible for considerable self-pollution and

particularly for bacteriological and viral contamination. Each hec-

tare of pond produces tons of undigested feed and fasecal wastes

for every crop cycle. This induces the growth of phytoplankton,

protozoa, fungus, bacteria and viruses (like the Vibrio group grow-H

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

H

922

SUPREME COURT REP OR TS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

ing in shrimp faeces and in large part responsible for the

1988

collapse of lastwan's production) (Lin, 1989). The overuse of

fertilizers and of veterinary and sanitary products such

as

an­

tibiotics adds to the water pollution problem. It also contributes

to the decreasing resistance of the shrimp stock. Where intensive

shrimp farms are densely spaced, waste laden water tends to slosh

from .one pond to another before it

is finally discharged into the

sea.

Shrimp producers are extremely concerned about assured

supplies of clean water

as it is vital for their immediate economic

returns.

Large amounts of sedimentation in intensive shrimp ponds

is

posing serious disposal problems for shrimp farmers. From

100 to

500 tons of sediment per hectare per year are apparently ac­

cumulating. Since only some 10 tons of feed is used to produce

about 5 tons of shrimp per hectare per year, this raises questions

about where such incredible quantities of sedjment come from

(Rosenberry, 1994a:42). Ponds are cleaned after each crop cycle

and the sediments are often discarded

in water ways leading into

the sea, or they are sometimes used to build dikes. Their

putrefac­

tion inside and outside the ponds causes foul odours, hyper­

nutrification and eutrophisation, siltation and turbidity of water

courses and estuaries, with detrimental implications on local fauna

and flora ...... Biodiversity losses: The impacts of semi-intensive and

intensive shrimp aquaculture on biodiversity ("the totality of genes,

species and ecosystems in a region") are multiple. This is because

of the land area they cover; the water they pollute; the water

circulation systems they alter; the

wild fish and crustacean habitats

they replace; the risks they pose of disease transfer; the impacts

of released raised shrimp on the genetic diversity and resilence of

indigenous shrimp and possibly also their negative impacts on

other native fauna and flora ...... Health hazards: Health hazards to

local populations

living near or working in shrimp farms have been

observed in several places. For instance, in Tamil Nadu

(Quaid-e­

Milleth district near Pondicherry) an approximately 1,500 acre

large shrimp farm has been reported to have caused eight deaths

from previously unknown diseases within a period of

two months

following the installation of the aquaculture farm (Naganathan et

al.,

1995:601). There are numerous hazards to public health along

S. JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 923

the shrimp production chain from the farmers through the various A

processors to the often distant consumers. The workers employed

on shrimp farms handle several potentially dangerous chemicals,

and

may be exposed to unsanitary working conditions."

According to the

UN Report -intensive ponds have a maximum life of only

B

5 to 10 years. Abandoned ponds can no longer be used for shrimp and

there are

few known alternative uses for them except some other types of

acquaculture. Apparently they can seldom

be economically rehabilitated

for other uses such

as crop land. The extent of abandoned areas by the

shrimp industry has been indicated

by the

UN Report in the following

words:-

c

"After a production cycle of about four or five months,shrimp

ponds under intensive use are cleaned and disinfected and the

'

polluted sludge is removed and often disposed of unsafely. This

treatment, however, does not usually suffice to maintain the ponds'

productivity for more than

five to ten yn years {I bid., Annex D

111/12). Entrepreneurs then move to other areas because of pollu-

tion and disease.

This mode of production has been called

"rape

and run" ( Csavas, 1944b). The altered milieu of these abandoned

ponds inhibits the spontaneous regeneration of vegetation and

their use for agriculture, forestry, other aquaculture or related

E

fishing activities. These abandoned areas do not appear in

worldwide estimastes of areas used for shrimp farming, which for

1993 were estimates to include

962,000 hectare, of which 847,000

hectares were in Asia. In December 1994 these areas were es-

timated to have increased worldwide to 1,147.500 with 1,017,000

F

hectares in Asia {Rosenberry, 1993 and 1994a). Globally, areas

affected

by the industry's practices over the last decade are

probably at least one third larger, or even more

if the total

infrastructures surrounding the ponds are accounted

for."

The

UN Report pithily sums up the "conflicts and externalities'' as under: -

G

"A major portion of the conflicts arising from the expansion of ...

shrimp farming are the result of environmental and social degrada-

tion that

is not included in the costs of shrimp production. Where

the industry assumes no responsibility for damages to other groups

arising from its activities, economists call them

"externalities". For H

A

B

924 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

example, abandoned ponds are usually virtually unusable for other

purposes for indefinite periods without costly rehabilitation, which

is seldom undertaken. Mangrove destruction, flooding or crops,

salinization or pollution of land and water associated with the

expansion of shrimp farming all affect the local people depending

on these resources

11

•

Alagarswami has divided the shrimp-farm technology into six types.

We have already quoted the relevant paragraph 5.1.2 of the report. Al­

though different experts have given different nomenclature to different

types of shrimp farm technologies,

we are of the view that the types

C indicated by Alagarswami in his report are based on the functioning of the

shrimp culture industry

in India and as such are acceptable. Keeping in

view the NEER! report and other material quoted and discussed by us, we

are of the view that the traditional

and· improved traditional types of

shrimp-farm technologies-defined

by Alagarswami -are environmentally

D benign and pollution free.

Other types of technologies -extensive, modified

extensive, semi intensive and intensive -create pollution and have degrad­

ing affect on the environment and coastal ecology. Such type of shrimp

farms carmot be permitted to operate.

We may refer to constitutional and statutory provisions which man-

E date the State to protect and improve the environment. Article 48-A of the

Constitution of India states that

"the State shall endeavor to protect and

improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life

of the country". Article 51-A of the Constitution imposes as one of the fundamen­

tal duties on every citizen, the duty to protect and improve the natural

F environment including forests, lakes,rivers and wild life and to have com­

passion for living creatures. The Environment (Protection) Act,

1986 (the

Act) was enacted

as a result of the decisions taken at the

United Nations

Conference on the Human Environment held at Stockholm in June,

1972

in which India participated. The India delegation was led by the then

Prime

Minister of India. The statement of objects and reason to the Act is as

G under:-

H

"The decline in environmental quality has been evidenced by in­

creasing pollution, loss of vegtal cover and biological diversity;

excessive concentrations of harmful chemicals in the ambient at­

mosphere and in food chains, growing risks of environmental

... .

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.O.L [KULDJPSJJj'GH,J.] 925

accidents and threats to life support systems. The world A

community's resolve to protect and enhance the environmental

quality found expression in the decisions taken

at the

United

Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stock­

holm in June,

1972. Government of India participated in the

Conference and strongly voiced the .emironmental concerns.

While several measures have been taken for environmental protec­

B

tion both before and after the Conference, the need for a general

legislation further to implement the decisions of the Conference

has become increasingly

evident."

Section 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(e) of the Environment Act are as under:-

"2. Definitions.-ln this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

c

(a) "environment" includes water, air and land and the inter­

relationship which exists among and between water, air and land,

and human beings, other

living creatures, plants, micro-organism D

and property;

(b) "environmental pollutant" means any solid, liquid or gaseous

substance present in such concentration

as may be, or tend to be,

injurious to environment;

E

(c) "environmental pollution" means the

presenc()n the environ­

ment

of any environmental pollutant;

(e) "hazardous substance" means any substance or preparation

which,

by reason of its chemical or physio-chemical properties or F

handling, is liable

to cause harm to human beings, other living

creatures, plants, micro-organism, property or the environment;"

Sections 7 and 8 of the Environment Act are as under :-

"'7. Persons carrying on industry operation, etc., not to allow emis-G

sion or the discharge of environmental pollutants in excess of the

standards.-No person carrying on any industry,operation or

process shall discharge or emit or permit to be discharged or

emitted any environmental pollutant in excess of such standards

as may be prescribed. H

926

A

SUPREME COUR;JfREPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

8. Persons handling hazardous substances to comply with proce­

dural safeguards.-No person shall handle or cause to be handled

any hazardous substance except in accordance with such proce­

dure and after complying with such safeguards as may be

prescribed.

B Section 15 of the Act makes contravention of the provisions of the said Act

punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to

five years

or with fine which may extend to one

lakh rupees or with both. If the failure

or contravention continues beyond a period of one year after the date of

conviction, the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term

C which may extend to seven years. The effluents discharged by the

commer­

cial shrimp culture farms are covered by the definition of Environmental

pollutant, environmental pollution and hazardous substance. The NEER!

reports indicate that the effluents discharged

by the farms at various places

were excess of the prescribed standards. Unfortunately, no action

is being

taken by the authorities under the Act.

D

Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989 (the

rules) have been framed under the Act. Rule 2(i) of the rules defines

"hazardous wastes" to mean categories of wastes specified in the Schedule

appended to the rules. Waste category No. 12 under the Schedule to the

E rules is as under :-

F

G

"SCHEDULE

Categories of Hazardous Waste

Weste Categories Types of wastes

Regulatory

quantities

1 2

3

Waste Category

Sludges arising from treatment of Irrespective of

No. 12 waste waters containing heavy any quality.

metals, toxic organics, oils,

emulsions and spend chemicals

and incrineration

ash."

Rule 5 of the rules makes it obligatory of every occupier generating

hazardous wastes to obtain authorisation

as provided under the said

rule.

H Rule 5( 4) requires the State Pollution Control Board not to issue any

-

S. JAGANNA TI! v. U.O.I. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 927

authorisation unless it is satisfied that the operator of a facility or an A

occupier, as the case may be, possesses appropriate facilities, technical

capabilities and equipment to handle hazardous waste safely.

Mr. Mehta has vehemently contended that the shrimp culture farms

are discharging highly polluting effluent which

is

"hazardous waste", under

the rules, Mr. Mehta relying upon the NEER! reports and other reports

placed on record has contended that none of the farms have obtained

authorisation from the State Pollution Control Boards.

The Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (the Water

Act) has been enacted to provide for the prevention and control of water

pollution and the maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of water. The

Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Water Act,

inter a/ia, state as

under :-

B

c

"The problem of pollution of rivers and streams has assumed

considerable importance and urgency in recent years

as a result of D

the growth of industries and the increasing tendency to urbaniza­

tion. It

is, therefore, essential to ensure that the domestic and

industrial effluents are not allowed to be discharged into the water

courses without adequate treatment

as such discharges would

render the water unsuitable

as source of drinking water as well as

E

for supporting fish life and for use in irrigation.

Pollution of rivers

and streams also causes increasing damage to the country's

economy."

Section

2G) & (k) of the Water Act are as under :-

"2. Definitions.-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

G) "stream" includes-

(i) river;

(ii) water course (whether flowing or for the time being

dry);

(iii) inland water (whether natural or artificial);

(iv) sub-terranean waters;

F

G

H

A

B

928

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

(v) sea or tidal waters to such extent or, as the case may

be,

to such point as the

State Government may, by

notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this be­

half;

(k) "trade effluent" includes any liquid, gaseous or solid substance

which

is discharged from any premises used for carrying on any

[industry operation or process, or treatment and disposal system],

other than domestic sewage.

Section

25 of the Water Act provides that no person shall, without the

C previous consent of the

State Board establish any industry, operation or

process, or any treatment and disposal system which

is likely to discharge

sewage or trade effluent into a stream or

well or sewer or on land. There

is nothing on the record to show that the shrimp culture farm owners are

even conscious of the statutory .provisions which require them to obtain

the necessary consent/authorisation from the concerned

Pollution Control

D Boards.

There are other legislations like Fisheries Act,

1897, Wild Life

Protection Act, 1972 and Forest Conservation Act, 1980 which contain

useful provisions for environment protection and pollution control. Unfor­

E lunately, the authorities responsible for the implementation of various

statutory provisions are

wholly re-miss in the performance of their duties

under the said provisions.

, At this stage we may deal with a question which has incidentally

come up for our consideration. Under para 2 of the CRZ notification, the

F activities listed thereunder are declared as prohibited activities. Various

State Governments have enacted coastal acquaculture legislations regulat­

ing the industries set up in the coastal areas. It was argued before us that

certain provisions of the State legislations, including that of the State of

Tamil Nadn are not in consonance with the

CRZ notification issued by the

G Government of India under Section 3(3) of the Act. Assuming that be so,

we are of the view that the Act being a central legislation has the overriding

effect. The Act (the Environment

Protection Act, 1986) has been enacted

under

Entrj 13 of List 1 Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. The

said entry

is as under :-

H

Participation in international conferences, assessment and other

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 929

bodies and implementing of decisions made there at.''

The preamble to the Act clearly states that it

was enacted to implement

the decisions taken at the

United Nations Conference on the Human

Environment held at Stockholm in June,

1972. The

Parliament has enacted

A

the Act under Entry 13 of List 1 Schedule, VII read with Article 253 of B

the Constitution of India, the CRZ notification having been issued under

the Act shall have overriding effect and shall prevail over the

law made by

the legislatures of the

States.

This Court in Ve/lore Citizens Welfare Fornm v. U11io11 of India & Ors.,

JT (1966) 7 SC 375, has dealt with the concept of "sustainable development" C

and has speciality accepted "The Precautionary Principle" and "The Pol­

luter Pays" principle as part of the environmental laws of the land. The

relevant part of the judgment

is as under :

''The traditional concept that development and ecology are op-

D

posed to each other, is no longer acceptable.

"Sustainable Develop­

ment" is the answer. In the International sphere "sustainable

Development" as a concept came to be known for the first time in

the Stockholm Declaration of

1972. Thereafter, in 1987 the concept

was given a definite shape by the world Commission on Environ­

ment and Development in its report called

"Our Common Future".

The Commission was chaired by the then Prime Minister of Nor-

way Ms. G .H. Brundtland and as such the report is popularly

known

as

"Brundtland Report". In 1991 the World Conservation

Union, United Nations Environment Programme and World Wide

Fund for Nature, jointly came out with a document called "Caring

for the Earth" which is a strategy for sustainable living. Finally,

came the Earth Summit held in June, 1992 at Rio which saw the

largest gathering of world leaders ever in the history -deliberating

and chalking out a blue print for the survival of the planet. Among

E

F

the tangible achievements of the Rio Conference was the signing G

of two conventions, one on biological diversity and another on

climate change. These conventions were signed by

153 nations. The

delegates also approved by consensus three non binding docu­

ments namely, a

Statement on Forestry Principles, a declaration

of principles on environmental policy and development initiatives

and Agenda

21, a programme of action into the next century in H

930

A

B

c

D

E

F

G

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

areas like poverty population and pollution. During the two

decades from Stockholm

to Rio

"Sustainable Development" has

come

to be accepted as a viable concept to eradicate poverty and

improve the quality of human life

while living within the carrying

capacity of the supporting eco-systems.

"Sustainable Development"

as defined by the Brundtland Report means "Development that

meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability

of the future generations to meet their

own

needs". We have no

hesitation in holding that "Sustainable Development" as a balancing

concept between ecology and development has been accepted as

a part of the Customary International Law though its salient

features have yet

to be finalised by the International Law Jurists.

Some of the salient principles or "Sustainable Development'', as

culled out from Brundtland Report and other international docu­

ments, are inter-Generational Equity, Use and Conservation of

Natural Resources, Environmental Protection, the Precautionary

Principle, Polluter Pays principle, Obligation to assist and

cooperate, Eradication of Poverty and Financial Assistance to the

developing countries. We are, however, of the

view that

"the

Precautionary Principle" and "The Polluter Pays" principle are

essential features of "Sustainable Development''. The "Precaution­

ary Principle" -in the context of the municipal law -means :

(i) Environment measures -by the State Government and the

statutory authorities -must anticipate,prevent and attack the

causes of envirollmental degradation.

(ii) Where there are threats of serious and irreversible

' damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a

reason for postponing measures

to prevent environmental

degradation.

(iii) The

"onus of proof' is on the actor or the developer/in­

dustrialist to show that his action is environmentally benign.

"The Polluter Pays" principle has been held to be a sound

principle by this Court in

Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action

v.

Union of India, JT (1996) 2 196. The Court observed, "We are

H of the opinion that any principle evolved in this behalf should be

S.JAGANNA'IH v. U.0.l. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 931

simple, practical and suited to the conditions obtaining in this A

country". The Court ruled that "Once the activity carried on is

hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such

activity

is liable to make good the loss caused to any other person

by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable

care

while carrying on his activity. The rule is premised upon the

very nature of the activity carried

on". Consequently the polluting

industries are "absolutely liable to compensate for the harm caused

by them to villagers in the affected area, to the soil and to the

underground water and hence, they are bound to take

all necessary

measures to remove sludge and other pollutants

lying in the

af­

fected areas". The "Polluter Pays" principle as interpreted by this

Court means that the absolute liability for harm

to the environment

extends not

only to compensate the victims of pollution but also

the cost of restoring the environmental degradation. Remediation

B

c

of the damaged environment is part of the process of

"Sustainable

Development" and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the D

individual sufferers as well as the cost of reversing the damaged

ecology.

The precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle

have been accepted

as part of the law of the land. Article 21 of

the Constitution of India guarantees protection of life and personal

E

liberty. Articles 47, 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution are as

under: "47. Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the

standard of

living and to improve public health. -The

State F

shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the

standard ofliving of its people and the improvement of public

health as among its primary duties and in particular, the State

shall endeavour to bring about prohibition or the consump-

tion except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating

drinks and

of drugs which are injurious to health.

G

48A. Protection and improvement of environment and

safeguarding of forests

and wild life. -The State shall en­

deavour to protect and improve the environment and to

safeguard the forests and

wild life of the country. H

932

A

B

c

D

E

F

SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

51A(g). To protect and improve the natural environment

including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have

compassion for

living creatures.

Apart from the constitutional mandate to protect and improve

the environment there are plenty of post independence legislations

on the subject but more relevant enactments for our purpose are

: the Water

(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (the

Water Act), The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,

1986 (the Air Act) and the Environment Protection Act) 1986.

(The Environment Act). The Water Act provides for the constitu·

tion of the Central Pollution Control Board by the Central Govern·

men! and the constitution of the State Pollution Control Boards

by various State Governments in the Country. The Boards function

under the control of the Governments concerned. The Water Act

prohibits the use of streams and

wells for disposal of polluting

matters. Also provides for restrictions on outlets and discharge of

effluents without obtaining consent from the Board.

Prosecution

and penalties have been provided which include sentence of im­

prisonment. The Air Act provides that the Central Pollntion Con·

trol Board and the State Pollution Control Boards constituted

under the Water Act shall also perform the powers and functions

under the

Air Act. The main function of the Boards, under the

•

Air Act is to improve the quality of the air and to prevent, control

and abate air pollution in the Country.

We shall deal

With the

Environment Act in the later part of this jndgment.

In view of the above mentioned constitutional and statutory

provisions

we have no hesitation in holding that the precautionary

principle and the polluter pays principle are part of the

environ·

ment law of the country."

We are of the view that before any shrimp industry or shrimp pond

G is permitted to be installed in the ecology fragile coastal area it must pass

through a strict environmental test. There has

to be a high powered "Authority" under the Act to scrutinise each and every case from the

environmental point

of view, there must be an environmental, impact

assessment before per-mission

is granted to instal commercial shrimp

H farms. The conceptual framework of the assessment must

be broad-based

•

S. JAGANNAIB v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,].] 933

primarily concerning environmental degradation linked with shrimp farm- A

ing. The assessment must also include the social impact on different

population strata

in the area. The quality of the assessment must be

analytically based on superior technology.

It must take into considerational

the inter-generation equity and the compensation for those

who are af-

fected and prejudiced. B

Before parting with this judgment, we may notice the

"Dollar" based

argument advanced before us.

It was contended before us by the learned

counsel appearing for the shrimp acquaculture industry that the industry

has achieved singular distinction by earning maximum foreign exchange

in

the country. Almost

100 per cent of the produce is exported to America,

Europe and Japan and

as such the industry has a large potential to earn "Dollars". That may be so, but the farm-raised production of shrimp is

much lesser than the wild-caught production. The UN Report shows the

world production of shrimp ftom 1982 to 1993 as under :

"Table 1 : World. Production of Shrimp

Thousands of metric tons

Year Farm-raised Wild-caught Total

1982 84 1,652 1,736

1983 143 1,683 1,826

1984 174 1,733 1,907

1985 213 1,908 2,121

1986

309 1,909 2,218

1987 551 1,733 2,284

1988 604 1,914 2,518

1989 611 1,832 2,443

1990 633 1,968 2,601

1991 690 2,118 2,808

1992 721 2,191 2,912

1993 610 2,100 2,710"

It is obvious from the figures quoted above that farm-raised production

c

D

E

F

G

of shrimp is of very small quantity as compared to wild-caught. Even if

some of the shrimp culture farms which are polluting the environment, are

closed, the production of shrimp

by environmentally friendly techniques

would not be affected and there

may not be any loss to the economy

specially

in view of the finding given by NEER! that the damage caused to H

934 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A ecology and economics by the acquaculture farming is higher than the

earnings from the sale of coastal acquaculture produce. That may be the

reason for the European and American countries for not permitting their

sea-coasts

to be exploited for shrimp-culture farming. The

UN report

-->

shows that 80% of the farm -cultured -shrimp comes from the developing

B

countries of Asia.

We, therefore, order and directed

as under :

1. The Central Government shall constitute an authority under

Sec-

tion 8(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and shall confer on

c

the said authority all the powers necessary to protect the ecologically

fragile coastal areas, sea shore, water front and other coastal areas and

specially to deal with the situation created

by the shrimp culture industry

in coastal

States Union Territories. The authority shall be headed by a

retired Judge of the High Court. Other members preferably with expertise

in the field of acquaculture, pollution control and environment protection

D shall be appointed by the Central Government. The Central Government

shall confer on the said authority the powers

to issue direction under

Section 5 of the Act and for. taking measures with respect to the matter

referred to in clauses (v),

(vi), (vii), (viii), (ix), (x) and (xii) of sub-section

(2) of

Section 3, the Central Government shall constitute the authority

E

before January 15, 1997.

2. The authority so constituted by the Central Government shall

implement "the Precautionary principle" and "the Polluter Pays" principles.

3. The shrimp culture industry/the shrimp ponds are covered by the

F prohibition contained in para 2(i) of the CRZ Notification. No shrimp

culture pond can be constructed or set up within the coastal regulation

zone

as defined in the CRZ notification. This shall be applicable to, all seas,

bays, estuaries, creeks rivers and backwaters. This direction shall not apply

to traditional and improved traditional types of technologies (as defined in

G

Alagarswarni report) which are practised in the coastal low lying areas.

4. All acquaculture industries/shrimp culture industries/shrimp cul-

~~

ture ponds operating/set up in the coastal regulation zone as defined under

the

CRZ Notification shall be demolished and removed from the said area

before March

31, 1997. We direct the Superintendent of Police/Deputy

H Commissioner of Police and the District Magistrate/Collector of the area

S.JAGANNA1H v. U.O.l. [KULDIP SINGH,].] 935

to enforce this direction and close/demolish all acquaculture in- A

dustriesfshrimp culture industries, shrimp culture ponds on or before

March

31, 1997. A compliance report is this respect shall be filed in this

Court

by these authorities before April 15, 1997.

5. The farmers who are operating traditional and. improved

tradition­

al systems of acquaculture may adopt improved technology for increased

production productivity and return with prior approval on the "authority"

constituted

by this order.

B

6. The agricultural lands, salt pan lands, mangroves, wet lands, forest

lands, land

for village common purpose and the land meant for public C

purposes shall not be used/converted for construction of the shrimp culture

ponds.

7. No acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp

cul­

ture ponds shall be constructed/set up within 1000 meter of Chilka lake

and Pulicat lake (including Bird Sanctuaries namely Yadurapattu and D

Nelapattu).

8. Acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture

ponds already operating and functioning in the said area of 1000 meter

shall be closed and demolished before March

31, 1997. We direct the

Superintendent of Police/Deputy

Commissioner of Police and the District

Magistrate/Collector of the area to enforce this Direction and

close/demolish all acquaculture industries/shrimp culture industries,

shrimp culture ponds

on or before March 1997. A compliance report in

this respect shall be filed in this Court by these authorities before April

15,

1997.

9. Acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture

ponds other than traditional and improved traditional may be set

up/con­

structed outside the coastal regulation zone as defined by the CRZ

notification and outside 1000 meter of Chilka and Pulicat lakes with the

prior approval of the "authority"

as constituted by this

Court. Such in­

dustries which are already operating in the said areas shall contain

authorisation from the "Authority" before April 30, 1997 failing which the

industry concerned shall stop functioning with effect from the said date.

E

F

G

We further direct that any acquaculture activity including intensive and

semi-intensive which has the effect of causing salinity of

soil, or the H

936 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A drinking water or wells and/or by the use of chemical reeds increases

shrimp or prawn production with consequent increase in sedimentation

which,

on putrefaction is a potential health hazard, apart from causing

siltation turbidity of water courses and estuaries

with detrimental

implica­

tion on local fauna and flora shall not be allowed by the aforesaid

B

Authority.

10. Acquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture

ponds which have been functionin!;'operating within the coastal regulation

zone

as defined by the CRZ Notification and

Within 1000 meter from

Chilka and Pulicat Lakes shall be liable to compensate 'the affected

C persons on the basis of the "polluter pays" principle.

11. The authority shall, with the help of expert opinion and after

giving opportunity to the concerned polluters assess the loss to the ecol­

ogy/environment of the affected areas and of the individuals/families who

have suffered because of the pollution and shall assess the compensation

D to be paid to the said individuals/families. The authority shall further

determine the compensation to be recovered from the polluters

as cost of

reversing the damaged environment. The authority shall

lay down just and

fair procedure for completing the exercise.

E 12. The authority shall compute the compensation under two heads

namely, for reversing the ecology and for payment

to individuals. A

state­

ment showing the total amount to be recovered, the names of the polluters

from whom the amount

is to be recovered, the amount recovered from each

polluter, the persons to whom the compensation

is to be paid and the

amount payable to each of them shall be forwarded to the Collector/Dis-

F trict Magistrate of the area concerned. The Collector/District Magistrate

shall, recover the amount from the polluters,

if necessary, as arrears of land

revenue. He shall disburse the

compens~tion awarded by the authority to

the affected persons/families.

G

13. We further direct that any violation or non-compliance of the

direction of this Court shall attract the provision of the Contempt of Courts

••

Act in addition. ---·

14. The compensation amount recovered from the polluters shall be

deposited under a separate head called "Environment Protection Fund"

H and shall be utilised for compensating the affected persons as identified by

..

S.JAGANNATii v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 937

the authority and also for restoring the damaged environment.

15. The authority, in consultation with expert bodies like NEER!,

Central Pollution Control board, respective State Pollution Control Boards

shall frame scheme/schemes for reversing the damage caused to the ecol-

ogy and environment by pollutions in the coastal State/Union Territories.

The scheme/schemes

so framed shall be executed by the respective State

Governments/Union Territory Governments under the supervision of the

Central Government. The expenditure shall be met from the "Environment

Protection Board and from other sources provided by the respective State

Governments/Union Territory Governments and the Central Government.

16. The workmen employed in the shrimp culture industries which

A

B

c

are to be closed in terms of this order, shall be deemed to have been

retrenched with effect from April

30, 1997 provided they have been in

continuous service (as defined in Section 25B of the industrial Dispntes

Act,

1947) for not less than one year in the industry concerned before the

said date. They shall be paid compensation

in terms of Section 25-B of the D

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. These workmen shall also be paid, in addi­

tion, six year's wages as additional compensation. The compensation shall

be paid to the workmen before May 31, 1997. The gratuity amount payable

to the workmen shall be paid in addition.

The writ petition

is allowed with costs. We quantify the costs as Rs.

1,40,000 (Ruppes one lac forty thousand) to be paid by the States of

Gujarat. Maharashtra, Orissa, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and

West Bengal in equal shares of Rs. 20,000 each. The amount of Rs. 1,40,000

realised from the seven coastal States shall be paid to Mr. M.C. Mehta,

Advocate

who has assisted us in this case throughout. We place on record

our appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. Mehta.

T.N.A.

Petition allowed.

E

F