ORDER : J.B.PARDIWALA, J. 1. Our order dated 26th November 2021 reads thus : “1. Leave to amend. We permit the writ applicants to implead the State of Gujarat as one of the respondents. We also permit the writ applicants to implead the Collector, Kachchh as one of the respondents. The necessary incorporation shall be carried out at the earliest. The cause title be amended accordingly. 2. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants – residents of village : Vandi – Tuna, District : Kachchh, have prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) To issue a writ of mandamus and/or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to ensure that the fishermen of Vandi village, Tuna are able to access the sea without any hindrance and that all hindrances created as a result of the activities of the respondent no.5 company be removed forthwith; (B) To issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to immediately remove the illegally constructed railway line and do all that may be required to restore the mangroves in the region; (C) To issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to ensure that all the blocked creeks are opened and that the free flow of water is maintained in the region for development of mangroves and to protect whatever mangroves are left. (D) To issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to remove all the construction / development that has been erected without permission of the relevant authorities. (E) To impose exemplary penalty on the respondent company for willfully and knowingly breaching the environmental laws. (F) To direct the respondent company to compensate the fishermen in the region. (G) To pass any other and further order that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. We have heard Mr. Narendra L. Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicants, Mr. Mihir Joshi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 – Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Private Limited; Mr. Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent No.4 – Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, and Mr. We have heard Mr. Narendra L. Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicants, Mr. Mihir Joshi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 – Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Private Limited; Mr. Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent No.4 – Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, and Mr. Dhaval Vyas, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 - Deendayal Port Trust. 4. This litigation, in public interest, has something to do with the difficulties faced by fishermen of village : Vandi, Tuna and other surrounding villages on account of development that has taken place in the area at the instance of the respondent No.5. The villages, we are talking about, are all coastal villages. It is the case of the writ applicants that earlier, village : Vandi was right on the shore, however, with the developments that took place over a period of time, the shore is now at a distance of about 7 kms. According to the writ applicants, the only means of their livelihood is fishing, and as on date, the entire fishermen folk are finding it extremely difficult to reach upto the sea as they have to travel almost a distance of 7 kms. Mr. Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicants pointed out that as on date, the fishermen are at the mercy of one individual, who owns a plot, which is right on the shore. This individual is kind enough to permit the fishermen to stay at his plot. In other words, it is easy for the fishermen to travel into the deep sea in their respective boats from the plot owned by a private individual. 5. According to Mr. Jain, there is no dispute as regards the fact that substantial development has taken place, which includes two Railway lines, roads, etc. It is virtually impossible now to disturb all these constructions. However, the villagers of this village expect the State or any other authority to provide them some access from their respective villages so that without any hindrance or obstruction, they can straightway reach upto the shore. 6. This litigation is now three years old. Only two respondents i.e. the respondents Nos.4 and 5 respectively have filed their reply. Mr. Jain pointed out that he has filed a rejoinder, but, the rejoinder does not seem to be on record. 6. This litigation is now three years old. Only two respondents i.e. the respondents Nos.4 and 5 respectively have filed their reply. Mr. Jain pointed out that he has filed a rejoinder, but, the rejoinder does not seem to be on record. 7. According to Mr.Joshi, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5, the entire writ application filed in public interest is frivolous. Mr. Joshi would submit that whatever has been argued today by Mr. Jain as recorded above does not form part of the pleadings. In the absence of specific pleadings, it is difficult for the respondent No.5 to meet with the exact case put up by the writ applicants. Mr. Joshi would further submit that there does not seem to be any substance in the grievance of the villagers as regards the difficulties caused so far as access to the sea is concerned. According to Mr. Joshi, the construction, which has been undertaken, is in such a manner that at no stage, the float of water is blocked. 8. Mr. Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India would submit that as such, the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, has no role to play so far as the present litigation is concerned. Mr. Vyas pointed out that the main respondent, who would be in a position to assist this Court, is the respondent No.2 – The Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority (for short, “the GCZMA”). It is this authority, who has granted all the permissions so far. 9. Mr. Dhaval Vyas, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 - Deendayal Port Trust would submit that his client also has no role to play. 10. We take notice of the fact that this matter was taken up for the first time for hearing on 9th May 2018. A Coordinate Bench of this Court issued notice, but, the same was restricted only to the respondent No.2. It seems that as on date, no notice has been issued to the State of Gujarat. We are of the view that the presence of the State of Gujarat for effective adjudication of this litigation is necessary. The first thing we should do is to issue notice to the State of Gujarat. It seems that as on date, no notice has been issued to the State of Gujarat. We are of the view that the presence of the State of Gujarat for effective adjudication of this litigation is necessary. The first thing we should do is to issue notice to the State of Gujarat. We also take notice of the fact that the respondent No.2, although served with the notice issued by this Court three years back, yet has chosen not to remain present either in person or through an advocate and make its stance clear. 11. We have also heard Mr. Rutvij Oza, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 – the Gujarat Pollution Control Board. According to Mr. Oza, his client has also no role to play. 12. It appears that the entire responsibility is sought to be fastened on the respondent No.2. 13. The main contesting parties in this litigation are the writ applicants on one hand and the respondent No.5 on the other. The writ applicants have one part of the story to narrate, whereas the respondent No.5 has altogether different a story to narrate. There is no report of any authority or responsible officer on record as regards the case put up by the writ applicants. 14. In such circumstances referred to above, it is going to be difficult for this Court to adjudicate this writ application. 15. Let Notice be issued to the State of Gujarat, returnable on 17th December 2021. Mr. Ronak Raval, the learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for and on behalf of the State of Gujarat. We want Mr. Raval to look into this matter closely and discuss the same with the highest officers of the Government and place an appropriate reply or report on record by the next of hearing. 16. Let Notice be issued to the Collector, Kachchh also, returnable on 17th December 2021. 17. The respondent No.2 owes an explanation why it has not appeared so far before this Court. Let fresh Notice be issued to the respondent No.2, returnable on 17th December 2021. We permit Direct Service. 18. On the next date of hearing i.e. 17th December 2021, we direct the responsible officer of the GCZMA to personally remain present before this Court and assist us. Let fresh Notice be issued to the respondent No.2, returnable on 17th December 2021. We permit Direct Service. 18. On the next date of hearing i.e. 17th December 2021, we direct the responsible officer of the GCZMA to personally remain present before this Court and assist us. We intend to put few questions to the authority i.e. the respondent No.2 so as to find out some way to ease the difficulties and problems faced by the villagers, if any. 19. The first thing we shall determine is the genuineness of the cause raised in this writ application filed in public interest. If, we are, prima facie, convinced with the genuineness of the cause, we shall, thereafter, proceed further to find a way out. No serious adjudication is required. All that we shall attempt is to ensure that the villagers have a smooth passage from village : Vandi, Tuna, etc., upto the shore. That will be the only concern of this Court in this litigation. 20. One copy of this order shall be furnished to Mr. Ronak Raval, the learned A.G.P. at the earliest for its onward communication.” 2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the officials of the GCZMA undertook the site inspection on 9th December 2021 and 10th December 2021 respectively. The report of the site inspection visit at Tuna-Vandi village, Taluka Anjar, District Kachchh, has been placed before us and the same is ordered to be taken on record. The gist of the report is as under : “1. LITERATURE AND DOCUMENT REVIEWED (ANNEXURE – I) 1.1 Environmental & CRZ Clearance for construction of berthing and allied facilities off Tekra near Tuna, Gujarat by M/s. Kandla Port Trust. Dtd. 1st November 2011 (Annexure– I-A) 1.2 Change of name/transfer of EC/CRZ granted for the project “Creation of berthing and allied facilities off Tekra near Tuna (Outside Kandla Creek). Dtd. 10th November 2014 in the name of M/s. Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Pvt. Ltd. (Annexure – I-B) 1.3 Amendment in the Consent to Establish/NOC of Gujarat Pollution Control Board. Dtd. 18/11/2014. (Annexure – I-C) 1.4 Environmental & CRZ Clearance for Development of 3 remaining integrated facilities (Stage–I) within the existing Kandla Port Trust at Gandhidham, Kutch, Gujarat by M/s Kandla Port Trust - Dtd. 18th February, 2020. (Annexure–I-D) 1.5 Fisheries Department Official gazette no. GHKH-117- 2016-FDX-152015-879-T, dtd. 22.11.2016 declaring Fish Landing Sites in the State. Dtd. 18/11/2014. (Annexure – I-C) 1.4 Environmental & CRZ Clearance for Development of 3 remaining integrated facilities (Stage–I) within the existing Kandla Port Trust at Gandhidham, Kutch, Gujarat by M/s Kandla Port Trust - Dtd. 18th February, 2020. (Annexure–I-D) 1.5 Fisheries Department Official gazette no. GHKH-117- 2016-FDX-152015-879-T, dtd. 22.11.2016 declaring Fish Landing Sites in the State. (Annexure – I-E) 1.6 A google Image map showing all the locations of Vandi, Tuna Villages, Creeks, Railway & Road bridge & Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Limited and Deendayal Port Trust areas and other areas as referred in the petition. (Annexure – I-F) 2. MEMBERS OF THE TEAM THAT CONDUCTED THE SITE VISIT: 2.1 During the site visit on 09.12.2021 and 10.12.2021, the following officials and representatives remained present: i. GCZMA (Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority), ii. Gujarat Pollution Control Board, iii. Collectorate, Kutch (Mamlatdar – Anjar) iv. Asst. Director of Fisheries, Bhuj – Kutch along with other Officials from Fisheries Dept., v. Dy. Chief Engineer – Deendayal Port Trust (DPT), Superintendent of Engineer – DPT, vi. Representatives of Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Limited 2.2 Two representatives of the petitioners also remained present on the first day of the visit, i.e., 09.12.2021. On the 10.12.2021, no representative of the petitioner remained present. 2.3 On the first day of the site visit, i.e., on 09.12.2021, the concerned areas were physically visited and inspected. Discussions with the fishermen were also conducted on the site. 2.4 On the second day of the site visit, i.e., on 10.12.2021, the officials of the GCZMA took the boat (i.e., travelled in the boat) in the Tekrawari Creek and the area of the creek passing under the Railway Bridge-A and the Road Bridge-A. The following observations are based on the actual joint physical verification carried out by the various officials and representatives as mentioned hereinabove. 3. OBSERVATIONS PURSUANT TO THE JOINT SITE VISIT: 3.1 During the site visit, it was found that the Fisheries Department has notified a Zero Point area as the Fish Landing site, which is located approximately 1 km away from Tuna and Vandi Villages. The creek, which forms a subject matter of the present proceedings is the Tekrawari creek and it was also ascertained from the local villagers that this creek is being used by the Fisherman. The creek, which forms a subject matter of the present proceedings is the Tekrawari creek and it was also ascertained from the local villagers that this creek is being used by the Fisherman. During the site visit, it was ascertained that the issues raised by the Fishermen pertain to Railway Bridge-A located at latitude N 22.58’ 13.01196” & E 70.5’ 49.59564 and Road Bridge-A located at N 22.58’ 15.5244 & E 70.5 38.1976”. 3.2 It was also observed that fishermen are using the Tekrawari creek (which is approximately 32 feet wide) for their fishing activities in the deep sea. The Tekrawari creek is the closest proximate creek, both, from the officially declared Fish landing site and Villages Tuna & Vandi. 3.3 It was also observed that there were a few boats parked on the bank of the creek in the area between the Railway Bridge-A and Road Bridge-A. It was informed by the representatives of the Adani Kandla Bulk Terminal Limited (AKBTL) during the visit, that the Railway Line and Tuna Port Road, have been constructed over the creek by AKBTL and that necessary permissions for the same, had been obtained from the competent authority. 3.4 It was observed that during physical verification, fishing boats can easily pass under the Railway Bridge-A and Road Bridge-A. This observation was made pursuant to an exercise carried out by the officials of the GCZMA whereby the officials travelled in fishing boats under the said bridges. Videos and photographs of the passage of boats under the said bridges have also been taken to demonstrate the easy passage. 3.5 However, possibly during highest high tide in the Tekrawari creek, which usually occurs once in a fortnight for a period of 45-60 minutes, passage through the creek under the Railway Bridge-A and Road Bridge-A may not be suitable, on account of which the fishermen may be facing some difficulties. It was observed that possibly due to this issue, the fisherman have chosen an alternative route which is located about 7 Km away from Vandi & Tuna Village to travel to the deep sea for their fishing activities. It was observed that some of the fishermen have started parking their boats at Dhawarwadi creek and use the 7 km road stretch to go back to Tuna & Vandi villages. It was observed that some of the fishermen have started parking their boats at Dhawarwadi creek and use the 7 km road stretch to go back to Tuna & Vandi villages. 3.6 It was also observed that construction debris was lying in the creek and at some places on the bank of the creek which is also creating hurdles for fishermen boats. This needs immediate removal and suitably it was advised to the Project proponent (AKBTL) during the site visit itself. 3.7 Dense mangroves were found on both sides of the creek. However, the same are not creating any hurdles for fishermen to pass through the creek. No sign of mangrove destruction was noticed during the site visit. 3.8 Few temporary houses of Fisherman were observed at the bank of Dhawarwadi Creek. These Fisherman are originally from Vandi village and during the fishing season they do carry out fishing activities from this place. 3.9 Branch of Dhawarwadi creek which ultimately meets the deep sea gets narrowed and effected by natural siltation. 3.10 It has been also observed that near the backup area gate, two sidelines of railway branches have been constructed by the project proponent, i.e., AKBTL, without any permission from the competent authority. However, AKBTPL has produced relevant papers stating that they have approached the Ministry of Environment & Forests & Climate Change, Government of India & Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority [GCZMA] for amendment in the Environmental Clearance & CRZ permission. It was informed by the project proponent that currently; the matter is under consideration at the level of MoEF & CC, GoI & GCZMA. 4. CONCLUSION: 4.1 After the joint site visit conducted on 09.12.2021 and 10.12.2021, it is concluded that the creek is easily accessible and usable for the fishermen except during the highest high tide which occurs once in a fortnight for a limited time duration. This issue can easily be resolved by carrying out widening and deepening the creek for about a distance of 700 mt. [between Railway Bridge-A to Road Bridge-A]: 4.2 The Project proponent has agreed vide their latter dated 16th December-2021 [as attached as Annexure- 1-G] to carry out above said work to ease the difficulties being faced by the fishermen. This issue can easily be resolved by carrying out widening and deepening the creek for about a distance of 700 mt. [between Railway Bridge-A to Road Bridge-A]: 4.2 The Project proponent has agreed vide their latter dated 16th December-2021 [as attached as Annexure- 1-G] to carry out above said work to ease the difficulties being faced by the fishermen. The Project Proponent has also been advised during the site visit to remove all construction debris within and on the bank of the creek and dispose of the same, in accordance with applicable rules and norms.” 4. We heard Mr.Narendra L.Jani, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicants, Ms.Manisha Lavkumar Shah, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the State, and Mr.Mihir Joshi, the learned senior counsel for Singhi & Co. appearing for the respondent no.5. 5. We are of the view that the widening and deepening the creek for a distance of 700 meters between the Railway Bridge-A to Road Bridge-A would ease the difficulties of the fishermen of village Tuna-Vandi. The project proponent has agreed to carry out the said work so as to ease the difficulties being faced by the fishermen. 6. We direct the project proponent to undertake this work of widening and deepening the creek for a distance of about 700 meters as shown in the map attached with the report, at the earliest, and the project proponent shall also remove all the construction debris within and on the bank of the creek and dispose of the same in accordance with the applicable rules and norms. 7. With the aforesaid, we close this litigation filed in public interest and dispose of the same.