NIYAMAVEDI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed as a public interest litigation. The petitioner claims to be an environmental legal organisation. They have projected the plight of fishermen community on account of certain policy decisions taken by the Government of India. The substantial contention urged by the petitioner is in regard to the policy of Government permitting deep sea fishing. According to them, the issue was under consideration of the Government for quite a long time and various studies have been conducted by Government approved organisations and even with the assistance of Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations. As far as India is concerned, there had been several complaints regarding deep sea fishing vessels conducting fishing operations near the shore waters and often within territorial waters causing damage to the resources as also the livelihood of small scale fishermen. A committee has been constituted by the Ministry of Food Processing Industry in February 1995 under the chairmanship of Sri. P. Murari. One of the tasks assigned to the Committee was to ascertain the necessity of fishing vessels under the new deep sea fishing policy. Ext. P6 is the report of the Committee which is submitted in February 1996 to review deep sea fishing, commonly known as Murari Committee Report, and on acceptance of the said recommendations, a new Deep Sea Fishing Policy, 1991 was brought into effect by which the attempt of foreign fishing vessels to exploit deep sea fishing was curtailed.

(2.) According to the petitioner, by virtue of the Export Import Policy of Government of India (EXIM) during 2000 -2001, Government of India permitted import of fishing vessels through the Special Import Licence Rules and 11 companies imported 32 deep sea fishing vessels and started operation in the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). In fact, there were no guidelines for fishing in Indian EEZ. Accordingly, the first set of guidelines were issued on 01/11/2002. According to the petitioner, those guidelines were in accordance with the safety of the nation and protecting the interest of the traditional fishermen. Complaint of the petitioner is that the guidelines were amended from time to time in order to help the deep sea fishing vessels.

(3.) On 10/09/2007, the Inter Ministerial Empowered Committee held a meeting to consider the representation submitted by the deep sea fishing vessel operators. The matter was referred to a sub committee who submitted a report on 11/07/2008. They did not agree with the various issues raised by the vessel operators. Thereafter, an expert committee was constituted under the chairmanship of Dr. S. Ayyappan, who submitted a report to the Ministry of Agriculture in October 2008. It is further stated that, in July 2011, the Inter Ministerial Empowered Committee constituted a Sub Committee to streamline the procedure for grant of Letter Of Permission (LOP) to vessels. A report was submitted on 22/11/2011 and based on the recommendations, the Government issued public notice and guidelines on 18/01/2013, which is produced as Ext. P1. According to the petitioner, as against the earlier procedure, substantial changes have been accepted by the new guidelines. Petitioner further states that, on 01/08/2013, the Government constituted another Expert Committee for Comprehensive Review of Deep Sea Fishing Policy and Guidelines. The Committee submitted its report in August 2014. It was recommended that waters beyond 500 meters depth are not optimally exploited and therefore fleet size of 1178 deep sea fishing vessels can be considered. It is also stated that already 908 deep sea fishing vessels are operating and further 270 deep sea fishing vessels are to be deployed. According to the petitioner, if such further vessels are deployed, it would amount to marine exploitation as the existing operators themselves are not reporting the daily position of the vessels to the Coast Guard or to the Mercantile Marine Department for renewal of permit. Pursuant to the said report, it is stated that the 1st respondent issued new guidelines on 12/11/2014. It is stated that, in the new guidelines of 2014, several features of 2013 guidelines were omitted to benefit the LOP operators. It is also stated that the 1st respondent issued a public notice on 28/11/2014 calling upon Indian entrepreneurs who intend to do fishing in Indian EEZ to obtain LOP. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid action would affect the interest of traditional fishermen and the marine ecology. According to the petitioner, on account of subsequent policies and recommendations, the effect of Murari Committee Report has been given a complete go by. Therefore petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: