Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, J.

This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.45498 of 2002 dated 19.12.2002, wherein the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ appeal are as follows.

(a) Appellant Rameswaran Port Visai Padagu Meenavar Sangam is a registered sangam espousing the cause of its members numbering about 1000, who are all possessing mechanised boats and doing fishing operations in the coastal towns in and around Rameswaram. The writ petition was filed on behalf of 77 members, whose names are listed in the impugned order in writ petition dated 23.11.2002.

3. A counter affidavit is filed in the writ appeal by the respndents, wherein it is stated that Ramnad District is in close proximity with Srilankan waters and the fishermen at Rameswaram area were already warned about the need to conduct fishing within the Indian territorial waters and nobody engaged in fishing shall cross the IBL and such acts will be treated as violation of provisions of the Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1983 and the Rules framed thereunder. It is also stated that eversince the internal surge in Srilanka, the fishing activities in the Srilankan area were prohibited by their Government, which has given an opportunity to the Indian fishermen to conduct fishing in and around Katcha Theevu area and in order to curb the activities of the Indian fishermen i.e., crossing of IBL, several instructions and warning were given not to cross the IBL. The Srilankan Government brought to the notice of the Government of Tamil Nadu that in gross violation, the Indian fishing trawlers are conducting fishing in Srilankan waters, which has resulted not only as threat to the coastal security, but also the risk of loss of lives of the fishermen due to firing upon the boats by Srilankan Navi. In spite of these things, fishermen continued fishing beyond IBL and thereafter only the Government imposed penalties through letter No.SR.III/35614/92, dated 6.7.1993, which was later modified through G.O.Ms.No.113 dated 10.7.2000 by increasing the amont of fine. The claim of the appellant that due to natural calamities there is possibility of crossing IBL can be proved only before the authorised Adjudication Officer and penalties are imposed to those who crosses IBL. The third respondent being an Adjudication Officer and vested with the powers of adjudication, it is for the appellant to file appeal before the appellate authority i.e., the Director of Fisheries.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

5. The impugned order in the writ petition dated 23.11.2002 reads as follows, "FISHERIES DEPARTMENT From To Thiru R.Singamuthiah,B.Sc.,D.Fsc. Thiru N.J.Bose, Assistant Director of Rameswaram Port Visai Fisheries (Sea Wealth) Padagu Meenavar Sangam, Rameswaram. Rameswaram.

Na.Ka.No.114/E/2002, dated 23-11-2002 Sir, Sub: Fishing- Mechanised Boats- Fishing beyong I.B.L. - Fine Remittance requested - reg.

The details of the boats are shown in the appendix.

(sd)Assistant Director of Fisheries (Sea Wealth) Rameswaram Copy to all Mechanised Boats Associations."

It is an admitted fact that the third respondent herein is the Adjudication Officer under section 17 of the Tamil Nadu Marine and Fishing Regulation Act, 1983. Section 17 reads as follows, "17 (1) Where any authorised officer has reason to believe that any fishing vessel has not been provided with buoy, first aid box, equipment for communication and life saving and fire fighting appliances in conformity with the rules made under this Act or any fishing vessel is being or has been used in contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or any notification issued or rule made thereunder or any of the conditions of the licence granted under this Act, he shall make a report thereof to the adjudicating officer.