THIMMASHETTY Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 05.03.2013 impugned at Annexure -C to the petition.

(2.) In view of the stand taken on behalf of the respondents, subsequently the petition has been amended and by the prayer a direction is sought against the first respondent to include the name of Vottehole Reservoir which is the subject matter in the instant petition to the list of lakes/reservoir in Annexure -III of the Inland Fishing Rules. There is no dispute to the fact that during the pendency of the petition, the Vottehole reservoir is included in Annexure -III of the Inland Fishing Rules and the fishing policy of the State Government would become applicable even in respect of the said reservoir.

(3.) A perusal of the petition papers in the light of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the respective parties, it is seen that respondents No.1 and 2 by the impugned order dated 05.03.2013 have granted fishing rights in favour of the third respondent as a special case for the periods between 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013. The petitioners claiming to be fishermen of the local area where the said reservoir is situate are assailing the said order before this Court contending that their right being local fishermen is defeated.