Sc Dismisses Petitions Filed By Aqua Farms Petitions

The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed three writ petitions filed by aqua farms, describing them as misconceived and not maintainable. It did not go into the merits of the arguments made by the companies. The judges held that the writ petitions could not raise the same arguments which had been dismissed by the court in November last year.

The deadline for demolition of the aqua farms expires today. But on the appeal of the government, the judges directed that the order should not be carried out for one more day.

The bench, consisting of Justice Suhas Sen and Justice S P Kurdukar, had heard the arguments of the companies and the environmentalists over two days. The companies argued that they were not heard before issuing the notification banning waterfront activities. In reply, environmentalist M C Mehta submitted that the companies had enough notice and in any case they could not rake up issues already decided by the Supreme Court.

 

Another bench, consisting of Justice Sen and Justice S Saghir Ahmad, began hearing the review petitions on the same subject last evening. But the arguments of attorney general Ashok Desai, representing Marine Export Promotion Development Authority (MEPDA), were inconclusive and the court will resume hearing today.

The highlight of the attorney generals argument was a blistering attack on the National Environment Engineering & Research Institute, which had given three reports about aqua culture projects. According to him, the first report commissioned by MEPDA gave a favourable opinion on the shrimp farms. Later, when the court asked it to report on the same subject, it made a complete turn-around and stated that the farms were ecologically harmful. While the first report took eight months of study, the second and third, made at the instance of the court, took 10 days. The first was called interim report and the second and third final reports.

Counsel used strong words against the total change in the stand of the institute. He further said that the court did not take into account the first report at all.

At this stage, Justice Ahmad, who was on the bench along with (now retired) Justice Kuldip Singh, who passed the judgment, remarked that the first report was taken into account by them and commented upon. Counsel for MEPDA had raised the same arguments and the court cross-examined.

Justice Ahmad further pointed out that they had plenty of other reports and data to come to the same conclusion. The first report was not the only basis for delivering the judgment.

Justice Sen added that most state governments had also given data regarding the aqua farms and the judges had examined all of them before coming to their conclusion.

Since the court is considering review petitions, it can go only into apparent errors in data that led to wrong conclusions. There can be no re-argument of the same issues. We will only see what was the impact of the first report, Justice Ahmad clarified.