Fisherman Care, Registered Association vs The Government Of India, Department Of Animal Husbandry, Dairying And Fisheries Rep. By Its Secretary & Ors. ….RESPONDENTS With

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8442 OF 2021

FISHERMAN CARE, REGISTERED ASSOCIATION ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, DAIRYING AND FISHERIES REP. BY ITS SECRETARY & ORS. ….RESPONDENTS

WITH

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.262 OF 2022

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 710 OF 2022

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1039 OF 2022

O R D E R

We have before this Court a Special Leave Petition, and three

Writ Petitions, where the common issue is the use of a fishing method

called Purse Seine Fishing. The Fisheries Department, Government of

Tamil Nadu vide its Order dated 25 th March, 2000 had banned, inter

alia, the use of Purse Seine Fishing nets within its territorial waters Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Rajni Mukhi Date: 2023.01.24

i.e. within 12 nautical miles (22 KMs from the Coast Line). By an 15:29:54 IST Reason:

Order dated 5th February, 2019 passed by the Madras High Court, the

Page 1 of 9 challenge made to the above Order was also dismissed. Thereafter,

another writ petition was filed before the Madras High Court by

Fisherman Care Association (Petitioner in S.L.P.(c) No.8442/2021),

this time relying on a report of an Expert Committee, made yet

another effort to persuade the High Court to revisit the whole issue

and allow Purse Seine Fishing within the territorial waters. The

Division Bench of the Madras High Court, however, dismissed the Writ

Petition holding that the Government has taken an informed decision

by banning Purse Seine Fishing within its territorial waters, and the

petition before it was by only “a class of affluent fishermen”, and thus

declined to revisit the matter, dismissing their petition vide Order

dated 20th April, 2021.

2. The above order is impugned in the petition.

3. The three writ petitions have also been filed by the petitioners

where the relief sought is i.e. to permit the petitioners to do fishing

with Purse Seine Fishing Nets beyond the territorial waters in the

State of Tamil Nadu. In Writ Petition No. 1039 of 2022, the specific

prayer is to strike down sub­rule (7) of Rule 17 of Tamil Nadu Marine

Fishing Regulation Rules, 2020, sub­rule (7) reads as under :­

“(7) No owner or master of a fishing vessels shall carry on fishing by pair trawling or fishing with purse seine net using any fishing vessel or craft whether country craft

Page 2 of 9 or mechanised boat irrespective of their size and power of the engine in the entire coastal area of the State.”

4. In short the petitioners are aggrieved by the restrictions

imposed by the Tamil Nadu Government on Purse Seine Fishing.

5. Whether the ban imposed by the State Government, within its

territorial waters is justified, is a matter which is pending

consideration by this Court. There is no interim order by this Court in

this matter and the ban, which is imposed by the State of Tamil Nadu,

still continues.

6. The method of Purse Seine Fishing, has more than one aspect

which needs to be looked into by this Court. There is definitely a

conflict of economic interests, between fishermen. Biological diversity

is another aspect which may fall for our consideration here. But on all

these aspects, we do not have a full report before us as yet. We have

been told at the Bar that the Government of India is examining most

of these aspects.

7. Interim relief is sought by the petitioners to fish beyond the

territorial waters of Tamil Nadu. They would argue that though the

Government of Tamil Nadu has no jurisdiction to impose any kind of

restrictions for fishing beyond its territorial waters, but for the reasons

that their vessels are fitted with purse seine nets, the State

Government is not allowing their vessels to pass through its territorial

Page 3 of 9 waters, thereby effectively prohibiting them to fish even in waters

beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State, and for which there is

apparently no restriction in law.

8. Petitioners submit that only Union of India has jurisdiction

beyond the territorial waters, which has placed no restrictions on

fishing by the method called ‘Purse Seine Fishing’. On the other hand,

they have filed an affidavit indicating that it can be permitted.

9. The petitioner would also argue that the powers of the State

Legislatures and its executive, cannot travel beyond the territorial

waters of Tamil Nadu as that subject is within the exclusive

jurisdiction of the Union of India. They would refer to Entry 57 of List I

of the Seventh Schedule which reads as under :­ “57. Fishing and fisheries beyond territorial

waters.” Thus, the petitioner would argue that the restriction imposed by the

State Government in not allowing their fishing vessels to fish beyond

its territorial waters are absolutely illegal, and the State Government

is exercising control which is beyond the jurisdiction of the State

Government under the Constitution of India. They pray for an interim

relief from this Court for fishing beyond the territorial waters of Tamil

Nadu.

10. This prayer is strongly opposed by Shri Mukul Rohatgi,

learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu, who

submits that this method of fishing i.e. Purse Seine Fishing (or PSF), is

Page 4 of 9 a ‘pernicious’ method of fishing, as it is harmful to marine life,

including fish. He would submit that PSF is a non­selective fishing

technology which captures all kinds of fish, which would include

protected species as well. It therefore has a dangerous effect on

ecology. Moreover, it is a method which is used by affluent and rich

fishermen or big fishing companies, as this technology is costly and is

beyond the reach of ordinary fishermen. The vast majority of

fishermen of the State of Tamil Nadu who are traditionally engaged in

fishing for their livelihood cannot afford this technology and depend on

traditional method of fishing. He would also submit that even if the

petitioners would be fishing beyond the territorial limits of the

State, yet they would be catching a large quantity of fish which has

its movement towards the coast and by catching them midway the

petitioners are depriving the traditional fishermen of their catch,

which belongs to them. Moreover, it is very difficult for the State

Government to either monitor or police fishing which may be done in

or around the territorial waters, as it is very difficult to demarcate and

ascertain as to where the territorial waters ends. It is further

submitted that since the matter is still under consideration, it would

be better to decide the entire matter and not pass any interim orders

as it would have huge ramifications throughout the country,

Page 5 of 9 particularly in the coastal belt, where fishing communities survive on

their traditional methods of fishing.

11. We have been informed at the bar that some of the coastal

States/Union Territories such as Gujarat, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh,

Odisha, Karnataka, Goa and West Bengal have not made any

restrictions on Purse Seine Fishing, within its territorial waters. This

ban has been imposed by the State of Tamil Nadu and also by the

State of Maharashtra. The coastal States are therefore divided on this

issue. As far as the fishing beyond territorial waters, but within

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is concerned, we have been told by

Shri K. M. Nataraj, Learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union

of India that the U.O.I. has placed no restrictions on this method of

fishing.

12. Learned counsel for the petitioners led by Shri Gopal

Sankarnarayanan and Shri Sirajudeen, Learned Senior Counsels have

submitted before us that a large number of families are also

dependent, in one way or another, in the fishing activity of the

petitioner. Moreover the fishing season will come to an end by next

month i.e. February 2023, and in case, they are not allowed to fish

beyond territorial waters they would also be incurring a huge loss as

there has been a large investment on their part for purchase of vessels

as well as Purse Seine Fishing Nets.

Page 6 of 9

13. After hearing both the sides at some length, we are of a prima

facie opinion, that interest of all parties need to be protected. Hence,

we propose to pass a restricted interim order, allowing the Purse Seine

Fishing beyond the territorial waters of Tamil Nadu, but within the

Exclusive Economic Zone, with certain conditions. These conditions

are as follows:

i) Only registered fishing vessel, as on date, will be

given permission i.e. a fishing vessel registered under

Section 11 of the Marine Products Export Development

Authority Act, 1972 (Central Act 13 of 1972) as well as

registered with the State Government under its Rules or

Regulations, presently in force in the State of Tamil

Nadu.

ii) The Fisheries Department will give permission to

such boats only, which are installed with an approved

Vessel Tracking System (VTS), which shall be kept

running during the operating time of vessels.

iii) These vessels will be allowed to operate only twice a

week i.e., on Monday and Thursday of each week with

the other restrictions of non­fishing period applying as

is applicable to all other fishing activity.

iv) The vessels which will be given this permission shall

leave the coastline on or after 8 AM and shall return to

Page 7 of 9 the designated place positively by 6 PM on the same

day.

v) It shall be mandatory for all the sailors to keep

their biometric card/photo ID with them.

vi) It shall be mandatory to provide the code of the VTS

to the Fisheries Department, Marine Police, Coast

Guard and the Indian Navy.

vii) Fisheries Department of the State shall also give a

colour code to these Purse Seine Fishing Boats for the

above purposes.

viii) The Registration Number of these vessels shall be

prominently displayed on the boat. In order to ensure

that the vessels have fished only outside the territorial

waters of the State, the tracking data of each vessel for

each of its trips shall be submitted the same day to the

concerned Assistant Commissioner, Fisheries, or such

other designated officer, after the vessels reach ashore.

ix) These boats shall be allowed to land/dock only at

one or more than one designated centre, which will be

earmarked by the Fisheries Department.

x) The State Fisheries Department shall display on its

website the permission granted by it for this kind of

Page 8 of 9 fishing i.e. Purse Seine Fishing to such

individuals/companies as the case might be and the

registration number of each of the vessels.

14. We must also make a mention that Shri Mukul Rohatgi, Learned

Senior Counsel during his submissions before this Court had also

referred to the two decisions of this Court 1 in his favour. He had

argued that this Court in these two decisions had made adverse

comments on Purse Seine Fishing. All the same, considering the

subsequent development since 1994 and the stand taken by the

Central Government in their affidavits, based on which this restricted

interim order is being made, the above two decisions are kept open

which will be considered when a deeper consideration is made, after

further inputs are received by this Court which are based on the

report of the Committee to be setup by the Central Government.

15. List in usual course. Pleadings be completed in the meantime.

..……….………………….J. [A.S. BOPANNA]

...………………………….J. [SUDHANSHU DHULIA]

New Delhi.

January 24, 2023.

1 State of Kerala versus Joseph Antony (1994) 1 SCC 301 & Kerala Swathanthra Malaya Thozhilali Federation and Others versus Kerela Trawlnet Boat Operators’ Association and Others (1994) 5 SCC 28 Page 9 of 9