1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. Mr. B.P. Das, Mr. A.K. Biswal, and Mr. B.P. Pradhan, learned advocates appearing for respective Non-Fishermen Societies made a statement that their causes/objections are not being considered by the Chilika Development Authority when the Draft Policy was prepared and placed before the Government for approval. According to them, the Non-Fishermen Societies should have been given opportunity to place their cases before preparation of the Draft Policy in view of the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Kholamuhana Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society v. State of Orissa, AIR 1994 Ori 91. They further contended that the copy of the Draft Policy has also not been supplied to them for which they are not in a position to raise their objection to the said policy.
4. Mr. P.K. Rath, learned Senior Advocate and Mr. S.K. Dalai learned counsel appearing for Fishermen Societies contended that the draft policy has been prepared long since by the Chilika Development Authority and has been placed before the State Government, but till now fruitful result has not yet been yielded by approving the Draft Policy.
5. Learned Advocates appearing both Fishermen Societies and Non-Fishermen Societies contended that their rights accrued for fishing have been taken away by the State Government Authorities, even though this Court has already protected their rights by delivering the judgment in the case of Kholamuhana Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society, which has been revisited by the apex Court in the case of S. Jagannath v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 811. It is further contended that so far as the Rights of Fishermen and Non-Fishermen, who are surviving on fishery right in Chilika Lake are concerned, the same has not been taken care of, by not formulating the policy which is acceptable for both the categories.
6. Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the Chilika Development Authority contended that they have given opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders and accordingly the draft policy has been prepared and placed before the Government for necessary approval.
7. Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that it will take three months time to prepare the final policy, to which this Court takes a serious view. At that time, he prayed that some time may be granted, so that at least the State Government can take immediate step for preparation of the final policy as per the draft policy submitted by the CDA by giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties including Fishermen Societies, Non-Fishermen Societies and Traditional Fishermen, if they have not been given opportunity by the CDA.
8. In view of the above, 15 days’ time is granted to the State Authorities to finalize the policy and file an affidavit to that effect by the next date.
9. So far as supply of copies of draft policy to learned counsel for the respective parties are concerned, Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for CDA is directed to allow the counsel appearing for the parties to take a photocopy of the draft policy from him.
10. Mr. Mohit Agarwal, learned Amicus Curiae brings to the notice of this Court that there is direction from this Court with regard to installation of drone cameras to protect Chilika Lake from different unauthorized activities, such as fishery gherries, and fixation of nets by putting bamboos etc. In this regard, Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate shall file an affidavit on the next date.
11. Mr. Agarwal, learned Amicus Curiae, also contended that the water of Chilika Lake is required to be protected. According to him, in view of the report furnished by the State Pollution Control Board, one contributor to the discharge of untreated effluent into the Chilka Lake is the Gangua Nala, which connects the Kuakhai river to the Daya river flow through Bhubaneswar City and which Daya river ultimately drains into the Chilika Lake. Therefore, necessary steps be taken to protect the water of Chilka.
12. Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to apprise this Court about the steps taken by the State Government in this regard by filing affidavit on the next date.
13. Call this matter on 19.12.2023. The affidavits as indicated above, be filed by the next date.
…………………………
