N. BHAGYARAJ Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the impugned order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka. No. 638/2013, dated 06.02.2014, whereby the 2nd respondent refused to register the mechanized fishing vessel of the petitioner, thereby not allowed the petitioner to berth his fishing vessel at the fishing harbour, stating that the petitioner's fishing vessel is having the length of more than 20 meters and fitted with mechanical means of propulsion having an engine of less than 150 horse power. The case of the petitioner is that he has been in the profession of fishing for the past 15 years. He entered into an agreement with J. Xavier Boat Building Yard for the construction of a deep sea -fishing vessel. While his fishing vessel was under the process of construction, the 2nd respondent inspected the premises of the Boat Building Yard and expressed his displeasure to the construction of the petitioner's vessel. Consequently, the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka. No. 638/2013, dated 06.02.2014, communicated the petitioner that the fishing vessel exceeding the length of 20 metres cannot be registered and it will not be allowed to enter the port premises by the operation of the Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1983 (in short "TNMFR Act"). The said communication was sent to the petitioner based on a resolution dated 19.05.2013 passed by the Thoothukudi Fishing Harbour Management Society for advancement of Fisherman. As per the said resolution, the fishing vessels of more than 20 meters shall not be allowed to enter the port premises and use the facilities of port after 01.06.2013. Based on the said resolution, a decision was taken by the 2nd respondent that fishing vessels of more than 20 metres shall not be allowed to enter the port premises. This decision of the 2nd respondent was communicated through the impugned order dated 06.02.2014 to the petitioner. Aggrieved over the action of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has made a representation to the 2nd respondent on 17.02.2014. However, the representation of the petitioner was not considered by the 2nd respondent. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition to quash the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 06.02.2014 and consequently, to direct the 2nd respondent to register the fishing vessel of the petitioner and to grant licence to his fishing vessel.

(2.) BY an interim order dated 04.04.2014, based on the affidavit of undertaking given by the petitioner that he will not venture into the sea for fishing in the event of he being allowed to dock his vessel in the port premises, this Court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to dock his vessel in the port premises, pending disposal of the writ petition.

(3.) IT is the case of the respondents 3 to 6 that the Government of Tamil Nadu has issued a Government Order in G.O.Ms. No. 73, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (Fs. 1) Department, dated 24.07.2009, providing for establishment of management committees involving officials and fishermen for the maintenance of Fishing Harbours. As per the said GO, the Thoothukudi Fishing Harbour Management Society was formed. The said Society passed a resolution on 19.05.2013 prohibiting the grant of any new permission to any new fishing vessel constructed beyond the length of 20 meters. The Assistant Director of Fisheries (Fishing Harbour Management), Thoothukudi issued a communication dated 10.12.2013 to the Presidents of all the Mechanized Fishing groups indicating that under the revised regulations, Mechanized Fishing Vessels cannot exceed a length of 20 meters and that the request to register any new Mechanized Fishing Vessel of more than 20 meters will not be entertained. In fact, by the Government Order in G.O.Ms. No. 166, dated 22.08.1995, the Government of Tamil Nadu has empowered the authority to refuse berthing place to any Deep Sea -Fishing Vessel in the notified place of berthing in cases of non -registration, non -renewal of fishing licence and non -availability of space in the notified place of berth. The petitioner's fishing vessel is having the length of more than 20 meters and fitted with mechanical means of propulsion of having an engine of more than 150 horse power. Now, the petitioner is seeking registration of his mechanized fishing vessel. The competent authority viz., the Assistant Director of Fisheries, (2nd respondent herein), can insist upon the petitioner to have the length of the vessel within 20 meters and fit the vessel with an engine with a capacity of less than 150 horse power. On the other hand, if the petitioner seeks for registration of his deep sea -fishing vessel, he has to go before the Surveyor -in -charge of Mercantile Marine Department, Thoothukudi. So far as the registration/license of the petitioner's deep sea -fishing vessel is concerned, the same has to be considered only by the Mercantile Marine Department established under the Mercantile Shipping Act, 1958 and Marine Product Export Development Authority Act, 1972. In fact, till date, the petitioner has not registered his vessel and he did not obtain any licence for using his fishing vessel from the competent authority under the Mercantile Snipping Act, 1958. According to the respondents 4 to 6, if any order is passed in this writ petition allowing the petitioner's deep sea -fishing vessel to berth in the notified area, it will directly affect their fishing rights. Thus, they sought for dismissal of the writ petition.