AP High Court Invokes Teachings From Hinduism, Christianity & Islam To Reinforce Protection Of Water Bodies, Halts Sand Excavation From Pond
Invoking teachings from Hinduism, Christianity, Islam which recognize water as a "common heritage" reflecting the essence of Public Trust Doctrine, the Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed District Collector's proceedings permitting excavation of sand and gravel from a village pond for National Highway construction.The Court held that excavation of minor minerals cannot be permitted by bypassing...
Invoking teachings from Hinduism, Christianity, Islam which recognize water as a "common heritage" reflecting the essence of Public Trust Doctrine, the Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed District Collector's proceedings permitting excavation of sand and gravel from a village pond for National Highway construction.
The Court held that excavation of minor minerals cannot be permitted by bypassing the statutory procedure prescribed under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam in a writ petition filed by four farmers of Kothapalem Village, Vizianagaram District, who depended on the Kannamnaidu Water Pond for irrigation.
The Court observed that the Doctrine of Public Trust, rooted in ancient Indian traditions and recognised as part of Indian environmental jurisprudence, requires the State to hold natural resources in trust for the public and preserve them for present and future generations. It said:
"Water and other natural resources has always been regarded as a sacred and life-sustaining resource across the world's major religions, reflecting the essence of the Doctrine of Public Trust. In Hinduism, rivers such as the Ganga, Yamuna, and Godavari are revered as divine mothers, and water is considered a purifier of the body, mind, and soul. The Vedas and other Hindu scriptures emphasize that natural resources are gifts of nature meant for the welfare of all living beings and should not be polluted or monopolized.
In Christianity, water symbolizes life, purification and renewal, as seen in the sacrament of baptism and numerous Biblical references describing water as God's blessing for all humanity. The Bible teaches that the Earth and its resources belong to God and human beings are merely stewards entrusted with their protection and responsible use. Similarly, in Islam, water is regarded as a divine gift and a source of life. Islamic teachings prohibit wastage and contamination of water and recognize that all people have an equal right to access this essential resource. Thus, the shared values of Hinduism, Christianity, Islam and all other communities recognize water not as private property but as a common heritage entrusted to human kind for preservation and equitable use from generation to generation. These religious principles closely align with the Doctrine of Public Trust"
The dispute arose after the District Collector permitted concessionaires engaged in National Highway construction to excavate and transport sand and gravel from the Kannamnaidu Water Pond.
Challenging the proceedings, the petitioners, farmers of Kothapalem Village, contended that the Kannamnaidu Water Pond was their only source of water for agriculture and also served nearby villages spread over nearly 2,000 acres. They submitted that sand and gravel, being “minor minerals” under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, could be excavated only under a lease or permit granted under the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.
Since the concessionaires had neither applied for nor obtained such permission, they argued that the District Collector could not permit excavation outside the statutory framework or invoke public interest to bypass the mandatory procedure, particularly in the face of ecological concerns.
The Government Pleader for Mines and Geology submitted that no application had been received from the concessionaires seeking permission to excavate sand or gravel from the pond and, consequently, no permit had been granted.
Accepting the petitioners' contention, the High Court held that the impugned proceedings, though couched as a request, were in substance directions issued to Government officials to facilitate excavation without following the procedure prescribed under the mining laws.
The Court held that the State is duty-bound to preserve and protect natural resources in public interest and that the District Collector failed to consider this principle while issuing the impugned proceedings.
"It is also significant to note that, though the verbatim used by 3rd Respondent by way of the impugned proceedings dated 08.04.2022 and 15.04.2022, at the first glance gives an impression of request, but the proceedings in its entirety reveals that it is nothing but a way of directions issued to the Government Officials i.e., Mining Department as well as the Irrigation Department, without taking comprehensively taking into consideration its catastrophic consequences and also ignoring the very fundamental and foundational aspects of “Doctrine of Public Trust”.
The impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd Respondent are emanated without there being any proper application, along with all the procedural prerequisites, as envisaged in Mining Laws in vogue. As such, the impugned proceedings dated 08.04.2022 and 15.04.2022 are contrary to the due procedure established under the law," it held.
Taking note of repeated instances of illegal excavation from water bodies, the Court also directed the State authorities to strictly comply with the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing identification, reporting, removal of unauthorised encroachments and illegal excavation from water bodies. It further directed the Chief Secretary to conduct annual review meetings to ensure effective implementation of the SOP.
Accordingly, the High Court declared the impugned proceedings arbitrary, illegal and violative of the Doctrine of Public Trust, set them aside, and disposed of the writ petition.
Case Title: Boddusatyavathi and Others v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Case No.: WP No. 12895 of 2022
Counsel for the Petitioners: Alekhya Reddy Tadasina
Counsel for the Respondents: Government Pleader for Revenue, Government Pleader for Irrigation Comm Area Dev, Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, and the Advocate General