S. JAGANNATH v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

p. 896

A • 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 B - 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 c 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. D • 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 E 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. F • 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. G - 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- B 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. c * 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 (Valsad district). D * 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 E 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. F * 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. G * 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 Mis Skyline Biotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Kagil, Kumta are very close H

p. 898

A 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 B 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 c 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.

D * 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 E 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- F 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. G * 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 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. B • 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 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. E Sanctions for ·such installations warrant careful consideration to avoid damages to the highly ecosensitive coral reef zones near this coast.

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. G 7.1 East Coast

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

p. 900

A • 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. I * Incidence of conversion of agricultural land into coastal aquacul- ture land into coastal aquaculture units which infringe upon the B 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. c • 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. D * 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 E 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.

F - Sunderban Mangrove/Littoral Forest, West Bengal - Chilka Lagoon, Orissa - Bhifar Kanika Wild Life Sanctuary, Orissa - National Park, Orissa - Subarnarekha Mouth, Orissa G 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- H ment, Pollution Control Board, and also by the MEF.

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. B Due to commercial aquaculture farms, there is a loss of :

- mangrove ecosystem - grazing grounds for cattle - potable water to contiguous population - fish catch c - agricultural produce - economic loss due to non-approachability of fishermen to creek, estuary and sea directly

* 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 E * Prohibition on conversion of agricultural land must be enforced with immediate effect.

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

p. 902

A • 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 B (wastewater and sediments) are essential.

•Water (from sources such as creek, estuary or sea) cess must be charged from the shrimp farm owners.

c * 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 D 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.

E • 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 F - 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 G 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 H 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. A - 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 B 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 c commercial shrimp farms in and around Chilka Lagoon, keeping in view the MEF norms dated February 19, 1991 in the State of Orissa, viz.

- 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

p. 904

A 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 B ' 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 c 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 D 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.

E ' 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- F 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. G ' 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. A • Desertification of cultivable land can result in increased saline intrusion on west coast.

Due to commercial aquaculture farms, there is a loss of : B - mangrove ecosystems - casuarina plantations - grazing grounds for cattle - potable water to contiguous population - fish catch - fishing nets c - agricultural produce - economic loss due to non-approachability of fishermen to sea shore directly

• 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

p. 906

A 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, 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 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 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 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 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 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, 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

p. 908

A "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 B 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 c 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. F 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.

G 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- H pettai.

S.JAGANNAIB v. U.O.I. [KULDIPSINGH,J.] 909

The Committee visited the Pullicat lake area on July 10, 1995. The findings 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 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 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 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 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 ·G 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 and destroy the water table. Further, prawn farms destroys sand dunes and vegetations and in times of tidal waves sea water could H

p. 910

A 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 B 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 c 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 Nagar has a dalit hamlet Edamani, This hamlet had a water tank which provided water to the nearly 35 villages. The source of water D was the village ground water. But due to the impact of the adjoining farm the water became saline making it unsuitable for consump- tion.

E 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. F 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 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. • 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." F

The conclusions reached by the Suresh Committee under various headings indicating the impact of shrimp culture farming on environment are reproduced hereunder :- G "(a) Effluent Pollution

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

p. 912

A 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).

B 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 c 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).

D 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 E 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 F 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 G 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.] 913

(b) Salinisation A

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 p.pt (20% but tolerate slightly higher or lower salinities. P. indicus 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 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 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 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

p. 914

A 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, B 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 (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 for banning industrial Shrimp Cultnre, .....The Team found that E 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 F 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. G 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 H 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. Kinklein 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

p. 916

A 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 B 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. c (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 : F 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 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 Vedaranyam 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, B 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 (p.8 of the Report). This fragile ecosystem has been under great threat by the industrial shrimp farming. In the main brackish water c 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 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 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 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

p. 918

A 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- B 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 c "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 (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, F 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 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 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

p. 920

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).

The UN Report gives the following picture regarding polluted waters and depleted fisheries :-

"Polluted waters and depleted fisheries; Shrimp farms use both sea F 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. G 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 H 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 Nellore 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) B .... 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 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 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, 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

922 SUPREME COURT REP OR TS [1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A 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 B 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.

c 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 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 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 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 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

p. 924

A 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 • B 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 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 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 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 under:-

"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- H 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. B While several measures have been taken for environmental protec- 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:- c "2. Definitions.-ln this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

(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 SUPREME COUR;JfREPORTS (1996] SUPP. 9 S.C.R.

A 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

E appended to the rules. Waste category No. 12 under the Schedule to the rules is as under :- - "SCHEDULE

Categories of Hazardous Waste

Regulatory F Weste Categories Types of wastes 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, G 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. JAGANNATI! v. U.O.I. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 927

authorisation unless it is satisfied that the operator of a facility or an 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 c 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 :-

"The problem of pollution of rivers and streams has assumed considerable importance and urgency in recent years as a result of 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 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 :- F "2. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

G) "stream" includes-

(i) river; G (ii) water course (whether flowing or for the time being dry);

(iii) inland water (whether natural or artificial);

(iv) sub-terranean waters; H

p. 928

A (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 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.'' A

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 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". E 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 F 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 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

p. 930

A 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 B 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 c 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 D 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- E 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.

F (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- G 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 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 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 c 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 of the damaged environment is part of the process of "Sustainable Development" and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the 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 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

p. 932

A 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 B 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· c 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.

F 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 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 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, c 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 D

Thousands of metric tons Year Farm-raised Wild-caught Total 1982 84 1,652 1,736 1983 143 1,683 1,826 E 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 F 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 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

p. 934

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 countries of Asia. B 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 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 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 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 Alagarswarni report) which are practised in the coastal low lying areas. G

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.

6. The agricultural lands, salt pan lands, mangroves, wet lands, forest lands, land for village common purpose and the land meant for public 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 E 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. F

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- G 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. We further direct that any acquaculture activity including intensive and semi- intensive which has the effect of causing salinity of soil, or the H

p. 936

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 Authority. B

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 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 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.

12Copy pinpoint12. 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.

13Copy pinpoint13. 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. ---·

14Copy pinpoint14. 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.

15Copy pinpoint15. The authority, in consultation with expert bodies like NEER!, A

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 B 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.

16Copy pinpoint16. The workmen employed in the shrimp culture industries which 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. E 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 F our appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. Mehta.

T.N.A. Petition allowed.