Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

D.Jailese vs The Deputy Director Of Fisheries

Madras High Court|15 February, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the third respondent, dated 24.01.2017, wherein and whereby the anchor permission granted to the petitioners was cancelled. The petitioners also sought for consequential direction to the respondents to permit them to carry on their fishing activities as per the license given to them by the third respondent.
2.By way of the impugned order, the anchor permission given to the petitioner was cancelled by the third respondent based on repeated complaints given by fishermen of the adjacent Keelamunthal village contending that their fishing net are being damaged, which ultimately causes law and order problem between two villages.
3.This writ petition is filed mainly by contending that the impugned cancellation order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
4.Heard both sides.
5.This matter was taken up on 06.02.2017 for hearing. On which date, it was informed by the learned Additional Government Pleader that a peace committee meeting was to be held on 08.12.2017 between the fishermen belonging to two villages. Accordingly, this matter was adjourned.
6.Today, when the matter is taken up for further hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the peace committee was held on 08.02.2017, both the parties have appeared and certain decisions were taken therein. Therefore, he submitted that the respondents will act as per the decisions taken in the peace committee meeting. He further submitted that the present petitioners are also signatories to the decisions taken in the peace committee meeting. A copy of the minutes of the meeting is placed before this Court. The decisions taken therein read as follows:-
?,f;Tl;lj;jpy; midj;J jug;gpdUld; ngrp gpur;ridfs; nfl;lwpag;gl;L rl;;lk; kw;Wk; xGq;F> kPdth; eyk; kw;Wk; kPd;tsk;> ghJfhf;Fk; bghUl;L mikjpf;Tl;l Kotpy; fPH;fz;l Kot[fs; xUkdjhf vLf;fg;gl;lJ.
1) nkyKe;jy; fpuhkj;jpy; jq;fp kPd;gpoj;bjhHpy; bra;a[k; btspkhtl;l mDkjp bgw;w kPdth;fs; mjpfhiy> 6.00 kzpf;F gpd;g[ g[wg;gl;L kPd;gpoj;Jtpl;L gpw;gfy; 05.00 kzpf;F jpUk;gptpl ntz;Lk; vd Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.
2) cs;Sh; kPdth;fs; (fPHKe;jy;> nkyKe;jy; kw;Wk; mUfpy; cs;s fpuhkq;fs;) ,ut[ 2.00 kzp Kd;ghf g[wg;gl;L mjpfhiy 6.00 kzf;Fs; fiuf;F jpUk;gptpl ntz;Lk; vd Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.
3) kPd;gpoj; bjhHpy; bra;a[k; kPdth;fs; kPd;gpof;f murhy; jil bra;ag;gl;l RUf;Fko tiyfs;> ,ul;il ,ae;jpuk; bghUj;jpa glFfs;> murhy; jilbra;ag;gl;l mjpf Fjpiuj;jpwd; bfhz;l nkhl;lhh; ,ae;jpuk; bghUj;jpa glFfs; gad;gLj;j TlhJ vd Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.
4) ghuk;ghpa kPd;gpoj;jiy jtpu rl;lj;jpw;F g[wk;ghd vt;tifj; bjhHpiya[k; bra;af;TlhJ vd xUkdjhf Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.
5) nkyKe;jy; fpuhkj;jpy; jq;fp kPd;gpoj;bjhHpy; bra;a[k; btspkhtl;l kPdth;fs;> fPHKe;jy; fpuhkj;J kPdth;fspd; tiyfis nrjg;gLj;jhtz;zk; glFfis ,af;f ntz;Lk;. khwhf vjph;ghuhj tpjkhf kPd;gpo tiyfs; nrjk; Vw;gLkhapd; mjw;fhd ,Hg;gPLf;F mk;kPdtnu bghUg;ghf ntz;Lk;
nkw;fz;l Kot[fs; Vfkdjhf Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.?
7.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that unless the impugned order is set aside, the petitioners will not be in a position to carry on their fishing activities.
8.On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that in view of the decisions taken in the peace committee meeting, the respondents will act in accordance with the above decisions taken in the peace committee meeting and therefore, the apprehension of the petitioners is not correct.
9.Considering the above-stated facts and circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing both parties to adhere to decisions taken in the peace committee meeting as extracted supra in its strict sense. The third respondent shall pass appropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioners in the light of the decisions taken in the peace committee, within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To
1.The Deputy Director of Fisheries Kanyakumari Division, at Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2.The Deputy Director of Fisheries, Ramnad Division, Ramnad.
3.The Assistant Director of Fisheries(South), Ramnad, Ramnad District.
4.The Assistant Director of Fisheries, Colachel, Kanyakumari District..
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

D.Jailese vs The Deputy Director Of Fisheries

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
15 February, 2017