/2023 INSC 0055/
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8442 OF 2021
FISHERMAN CARE, REGISTERED 
ASSOCIATION                                             ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT 
OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, DAIRYING AND 
FISHERIES REP. BY ITS SECRETARY & ORS.   ….RESPONDENTS      
 
WITH 
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.262 OF 2022
 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 710 OF 2022
   WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1039 OF 2022
 
O  R  D  E  R
We   have   before   this   Court   a   Special   Leave   Petition,     and   three
Writ Petitions, where the common issue is the use of a fishing method
called Purse Seine Fishing.  The Fisheries Department, Government of
Tamil   Nadu  vide   its   Order   dated   25 th
  March,   2000  had   banned,   inter
alia,   the   use   of   Purse   Seine   Fishing   nets   within   its   territorial   waters
i.e.   within   12   nautical   miles   (22   KMs   from   the   Coast   Line).   By   an
Order dated 5 th
 February, 2019 passed by the Madras High Court, the
Page  1  of  9

challenge   made   to   the   above   Order   was   also   dismissed.   Thereafter,
another   writ   petition   was   filed   before   the   Madras   High   Court   by
Fisherman   Care   Association   (Petitioner   in   S.L.P.(c)   No.8442/2021),
this   time   relying   on   a   report   of   an   Expert   Committee,   made   yet
another   effort   to   persuade   the   High   Court   to   revisit   the   whole   issue
and     allow   Purse   Seine   Fishing   within   the   territorial   waters.     The
Division Bench of the Madras High Court, however, dismissed the Writ
Petition holding that the Government has taken an informed decision
by   banning   Purse   Seine   Fishing   within   its   territorial   waters,   and   the
petition before it was by only “a class of affluent fishermen”, and thus
declined   to   revisit   the   matter,   dismissing   their   petition   vide   Order
dated 20 th
 April, 2021. 
2. The above order is impugned in the petition.
3. The   three   writ   petitions   have   also   been   filed   by   the   petitioners
where   the   relief   sought   is   i.e.   to   permit   the   petitioners   to   do   fishing
with   Purse   Seine   Fishing   Nets   beyond   the   territorial   waters   in   the
State   of   Tamil   Nadu.   In   Writ   Petition   No.   1039   of   2022,     the   specific
prayer  is to strike down sub­rule (7) of Rule 17 of Tamil Nadu Marine
Fishing Regulation Rules, 2020,  sub­rule (7) reads as under :­
“(7)   No owner  or master of a fishing vessels
shall   carry   on   fishing   by   pair   trawling   or
fishing   with   purse   seine   net   using     any
fishing   vessel or craft whether country craft
Page  2  of  9

or   mechanised   boat   irrespective   of   their   size
and power of the engine in the entire coastal
area of the State.”
4.     In   short   the   petitioners   are   aggrieved   by   the   restrictions
imposed by the Tamil Nadu Government on Purse Seine Fishing.
5. Whether   the   ban   imposed   by   the   State   Government,   within   its
territorial   waters   is   justified,   is   a   matter   which   is   pending
consideration by this Court. There is no interim order by this Court in
this matter and the ban, which is imposed by the State of Tamil Nadu,
still continues.
6.   The   method   of   Purse   Seine   Fishing,   has   more   than   one   aspect
which   needs   to   be   looked   into   by   this   Court.   There   is   definitely   a
conflict   of   economic   interests,   between   fishermen.   Biological   diversity
is another aspect which may fall for our consideration here. But on all
these aspects, we do not have a full report before us as yet.   We have
been told  at the  Bar  that the Government of  India is examining  most
of these aspects.
7.     Interim   relief   is   sought   by   the   petitioners   to   fish   beyond   the
territorial   waters   of   Tamil   Nadu.   They   would   argue   that   though   the
Government of  Tamil  Nadu has no jurisdiction to  impose  any  kind of
restrictions for fishing beyond its territorial waters, but for the reasons
that   their   vessels   are   fitted   with     purse   seine   nets,   the   State
Government is not allowing their vessels to pass through its territorial
Page  3  of  9

waters,   thereby   effectively   prohibiting   them   to   fish   even   in   waters
beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State,   and for which there is
apparently no restriction in law.
8. Petitioners   submit   that   only   Union   of   India   has   jurisdiction
beyond   the   territorial   waters,   which   has   placed   no   restrictions   on
fishing by the method called ‘Purse Seine Fishing’.  On the other hand,
they have filed an affidavit indicating that it can be permitted. 
9.     The   petitioner   would   also   argue   that   the   powers   of   the   State
Legislatures   and   its   executive,   cannot   travel   beyond   the   territorial
waters   of   Tamil   Nadu   as   that   subject   is   within   the   exclusive
jurisdiction of the Union of India. They would refer to Entry 57 of List I
of the Seventh Schedule which reads as under :­
“57. Fishing and fisheries beyond territorial 
waters.”
Thus,   the   petitioner   would   argue   that   the   restriction   imposed   by   the
State   Government  in   not  allowing   their   fishing   vessels   to   fish   beyond
its   territorial   waters   are   absolutely   illegal,   and   the   State   Government
is   exercising   control   which   is   beyond   the   jurisdiction   of   the   State
Government under the Constitution of India. They pray for an interim
relief from this Court for fishing beyond the territorial waters of Tamil
Nadu. 
10.     This     prayer   is   strongly   opposed   by   Shri   Mukul   Rohatgi,
learned   Senior   Counsel   appearing   for   the   State   of   Tamil   Nadu,   who
submits that this method of fishing i.e. Purse Seine Fishing (or PSF), is
Page  4  of  9

a   ‘pernicious’   method   of   fishing,   as   it   is   harmful   to   marine   life,
including   fish.   He   would   submit   that   PSF   is   a   non­selective   fishing
technology   which   captures   all   kinds   of   fish,   which   would   include
protected   species   as   well.   It   therefore   has   a   dangerous   effect   on
ecology.   Moreover,   it is a method which is used by affluent and rich
fishermen or big fishing companies, as this technology is  costly and is
beyond   the   reach   of   ordinary   fishermen.   The   vast   majority   of
fishermen of the State of Tamil Nadu who are traditionally engaged in
fishing for their livelihood cannot afford this technology and depend on
traditional   method   of   fishing.   He   would   also   submit   that   even   if   the
petitioners     would   be     fishing     beyond   the   territorial   limits     of   the
State,   yet   they   would   be   catching     a   large   quantity   of   fish   which   has
its   movement   towards   the   coast   and   by   catching   them   midway   the
petitioners   are   depriving   the   traditional   fishermen     of   their   catch,
which   belongs   to   them.   Moreover,   it   is   very   difficult   for   the   State
Government to either monitor or police fishing which may be done in
or around the territorial waters, as it is very difficult to demarcate and
ascertain   as   to   where   the   territorial   waters   ends.   It   is   further
submitted   that  since   the   matter   is   still   under   consideration,   it  would
be better to decide the entire matter and not pass any interim orders
as   it   would   have   huge   ramifications   throughout   the   country,
Page  5  of  9

particularly in the coastal belt, where fishing communities survive on
their traditional methods of fishing. 
11.     We   have   been   informed   at   the   bar   that   some   of   the   coastal
States/Union   Territories   such   as   Gujarat,   Kerala,   Andhra   Pradesh,
Odisha,   Karnataka,   Goa   and   West   Bengal   have   not   made   any
restrictions   on   Purse   Seine   Fishing,   within   its   territorial   waters.   This
ban   has   been   imposed   by   the   State   of   Tamil   Nadu   and     also   by   the
State of Maharashtra. The coastal States are therefore divided on this
issue.   As   far   as   the   fishing   beyond   territorial   waters,   but   within
Exclusive   Economic   Zone   (EEZ)   is   concerned,   we   have   been   told   by
Shri K. M. Nataraj, Learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union
of   India   that   the   U.O.I.   has   placed   no   restrictions   on   this   method   of
fishing.
12.   Learned   counsel   for   the   petitioners   led   by   Shri   Gopal
Sankarnarayanan and Shri Sirajudeen, Learned Senior Counsels have
submitted   before   us   that   a   large   number   of   families   are   also
dependent,   in   one   way   or   another,   in   the   fishing   activity   of   the
petitioner.   Moreover   the   fishing   season   will   come   to   an   end   by   next
month   i.e.   February   2023,   and   in   case,   they   are   not   allowed   to   fish
beyond  territorial  waters  they  would  also  be incurring   a huge  loss  as
there has been a large investment on their part for purchase of vessels
as well as Purse Seine Fishing Nets.
Page  6  of  9

13.    After hearing both the sides at some length, we are of a  prima
facie   opinion,   that  interest  of   all   parties  need  to  be  protected.   Hence,
we propose to pass a restricted interim order, allowing the Purse Seine
Fishing   beyond   the   territorial   waters   of   Tamil   Nadu,   but   within   the
Exclusive   Economic   Zone,   with   certain   conditions.   These   conditions
are as follows: 
i) Only   registered   fishing   vessel,   as   on   date,   will   be
given   permission   i.e.   a   fishing   vessel   registered   under
Section 11 of the Marine Products Export Development
Authority Act, 1972 (Central Act 13 of 1972) as well as
registered with the State Government under its Rules or
Regulations,   presently   in   force   in   the   State   of   Tamil
Nadu.
ii) The   Fisheries   Department   will   give   permission   to
such   boats   only,   which   are   installed   with   an   approved
Vessel   Tracking   System   (VTS),   which   shall   be   kept
running during the operating time of vessels.
iii)  These vessels will be allowed to operate only twice a
week   i.e.,   on   Monday   and   Thursday   of   each   week   with
the   other   restrictions   of   non­fishing   period   applying   as
is applicable to all other fishing activity. 
iv)  The vessels which will be given this permission shall
leave the coastline on or after 8 AM and shall return to
Page  7  of  9

the   designated   place   positively   by   6   PM   on   the   same
day.
v)     It   shall   be   mandatory   for   all   the   sailors   to   keep
their biometric card/photo ID with them. 
vi) It shall be mandatory to provide the code of the VTS
to   the   Fisheries   Department,   Marine   Police,   Coast
Guard and the Indian Navy.  
vii) Fisheries   Department   of   the   State   shall   also   give   a
colour   code   to   these   Purse   Seine   Fishing   Boats   for   the
above purposes.  
viii) The   Registration   Number   of   these   vessels   shall   be
prominently   displayed   on   the   boat.   In   order   to   ensure
that  the  vessels  have  fished  only   outside   the   territorial
waters of the State, the tracking data of each vessel for
each of its trips shall be submitted the same day to the
concerned   Assistant   Commissioner,   Fisheries,   or   such
other designated officer, after the vessels reach ashore. 
ix) These   boats   shall   be   allowed   to   land/dock   only   at
one   or   more   than   one   designated   centre,   which   will   be
earmarked by the Fisheries Department.
x) The State Fisheries Department shall display on its
website   the   permission   granted   by   it   for   this   kind   of
Page  8  of  9

fishing   i.e.   Purse   Seine   Fishing   to   such
individuals/companies   as   the   case   might   be   and   the
registration number of each of the vessels. 
14. We must also make a mention that Shri Mukul Rohatgi, Learned
Senior   Counsel   during   his   submissions   before   this   Court   had   also
referred   to   the   two   decisions   of   this   Court 1
  in   his   favour.     He   had
argued   that   this   Court   in   these   two   decisions   had   made   adverse
comments   on   Purse   Seine   Fishing.     All   the   same,   considering   the
subsequent   development   since   1994   and   the   stand   taken   by   the
Central Government in their affidavits, based on which this restricted
interim   order   is   being   made,   the   above   two   decisions   are   kept   open
which   will   be   considered   when   a   deeper   consideration   is   made,   after
further   inputs   are   received   by   this   Court   which   are   based   on   the
report of the Committee to be setup by the Central Government. 
15. List in usual course. Pleadings be completed in the meantime. 
                                                          ..……….………………….J.
[A.S. BOPANNA]
     ...………………………….J.
     [SUDHANSHU DHULIA]
New Delhi.
January 24, 2023.  
1  State of Kerala 	versus 	Joseph Antony (1994) 1 SCC 301 & Kerala Swathanthra 	
Malaya Thozhilali Federation and Others 	versus	 Kerela Trawlnet Boat Operators’	
Association and Others (1994) 5 SCC 28
Page  9  of  9