Madras High Court
R.1372 Lalgudi Circle Inland ... vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 22 March, 2022
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
and W.M.P.(MD).No.4102 of 2022
R.1372 Lalgudi Circle Inland Fishermen
Co-operative Society,
Rep. by its President,
Mr.Sollin Selvam S/o Maruthappan,
Valadi Post, Lalgudi Taluk,
Trichy District. .. Petitioner
Vs
1.The State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Animal Husbandry Dairying and
Fisheries (FS-6) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Fisheries,
3rd Floor,
Integrated Animal Husbandry Dairying and
Fisheries (FS-6) Department,
Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035.
3.The Assistant Director of Fisheries,
(Inland Fisheries),
16/2, Samadu Palli Street,
Kaja Nagar, Thiruchirappalli – 620 020.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
4.The Assistant Engineer,
O/o. Assistant Engineer,
Water Re-source Department – Irrigation Division,
Lalgudi, Trichy. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 4 th
respondent's Auction Notice in Letter No.10/2022/c/bgh/(yh). Dated
07.03.2022, pertaining to 1) Lake in Sankendhi Village, 2) Eastern lake
in Vellalur Village, 3) Western lake in Vellalur Village, 4) Lake in
Pallapuram and 5) Lake in Pudur Uthamanur Village, Lalgudi Taluk,
and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to
issue license for fishing right of 1) Lake in Sankendhi Village, 2)
Eastern lake in Vellalur Village, 3) Western lake in Vellalur Village, 4)
Lake in Pallapuram and 5) Lake in Pudur Uthamanur Village, Lalgudi
Taluk, in favour of the petitioner, based on the petitioner's representation
and resolution, dated 12.08.2021 and 17.11.2021, within the time
stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.Ananth C.Rajesh
For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai
Special Government Pleader
2/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned tender
notification, dated 07.03.2022, pertaining to 1) Lake in Sankendhi
Village, 2) Eastern lake in Vellalur Village, 3) Western lake in Vellalur
Village, 4) Lake in Pallapuram and 5) Lake in Pudur Uthamanur Village,
Lalgudi Taluk.
2.The petitioner has challenged the impugned auction notification
on the ground that the said auction notification has been issued in
violation of G.O.Ms.No.332, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries
Department, dated 17.11.1993.
3.According to the petitioner as per the aforementioned
Government Order, the priority should be given to the Fishermen Co-
operative Society or Harijans engaged in fishing and thereafter Panchayat
Localities and after that private individuals. According to the petitioner,
the fourth respondent without considering the same, has straight away
issued the auction notice without affording any priority to the petitioner's
society as per G.O.Ms.No.332.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
4.Heard Mr.Ananth C.Rajesh, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader, who accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this
Court to a similar issue raised in another writ petition filed by another
Fishermen Society in W.P.(MD).No.18848 of 2021 and would submit that
by an order dated 20.10.2021, passed in W.M.P.(MD).No.15671 of 2021
in W.P.(MD).No.18848 of 2021, the auction notification issued on similar
line without affording any priority, was directed to be stayed by the
learned Single Judge. He also drew the attention of this Court to the
G.O.Ms.No.332, in support of the contentions raised by the petitioner in
this writ petition.
6.However, learned Special Government Pleader has placed before
this Court a Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, dated
03.02.2021, passed in W.A.(MD).Nos.1251 of 2020 and 923 of 2020, in
the case of The Director of Fisheries, Fisheries Department, Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
Vs. S.T.Mani, involving a similar issue. According to the learned Special
Government Pleader, the grounds raised in this writ petition were also
raised in the writ petition filed by another Fishermen Society.
7.The Division Bench after analyzing the case, came to the
conclusion as seen from paragraphs 10 and 11 of the said Judgment that
the highest amount offered by the successful bidder will have to be
offered to the Fishermen Society to enable them to get the contract
awarded in their favour. Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the said Judgment
reads as follows:
“10.For the ensuing years, we call upon the
official respondents, including the Secretary to
Government, Fisheries Department, to adopt a
different methodology as suggested by the learned
Single Judge, by fixing the upset price and thereafter,
call for tender. The highest amount offered by the
successful bidder will have to be offered to the Bodi
Fishermen Society. It is better to follow this
methodology in future in all cases, as the Government
would not lose the revenue and in any case, fixation
of the upset price is a starting point and the same will
not be the actual price that will fetch in an auction. It
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
is a price, which will facilitate somebody to take part
in the auction, being the minimum value of the subject
matter of the licence.
11.The incidental issue is with respect to the
impleaded respondents. On a perusal of the status
report filed by respondent No.4, it is clear that
various violations took place. These violations are
with respect to contamination with the water and
reaction to facilitate the highest fishing. The rights of
the appellant in W.A.(MD).No.923 of 2020 is
certainly subject to the rights of the impleaded
respondent. Therefore, the official respondents shall
make sure that their rights are not affected, which is
inclusive of contaminating the water by polluting it
for facilitating the larger capture of fishing and
letting the water out, much to the suffering of the
farmers. If such activities are carried on, the
respondents are expected to cancel the licence.”
8.The exercise directed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid
Judgment is in the interest of the Fishermen Society. Their priority rights
as prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.332, which the petitioner relies upon has
not been disturbed. Hence, the same direction as given by the Division
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
Bench of this Court in the decision referred to supra can also be given in
the present case also, which will only be in the interest of the petitioner's
society, ultimately, any auction is conducted to get the best possible
price. At the same time, the petitioner's right as per G.O.Ms.No.332,
should also not get defeated. By the aforementioned exercise, directed
by the Division Bench, the rights of the petitioner's society to get priority
as per G.O.Ms.No.332, has not been defeated.
9.For the foregoing reasons, the impugned auction notification
cannot be quashed by this Court. But instead, the writ petition is
disposed of by issuing the following directions.
a) The respondents are permitted to proceed with the impugned auction
and complete the same.
b)The petitioner's society and its members are also allowed to participate
in the auction.
c) Once the Highest Bidder is determined under the auction, the price
quoted by the Highest Bidder shall be intimated to the petitioner's
Society and the petitioner's Society or its members if interested in getting
a contract awarded in its favour, shall quote the price quoted by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
Highest Bidder and on payment of the same, within a period stipulated
by the respondents, the petitioner or its members can get the contract
awarded in their favour in accordance with the decision of the Division
Bench referred to supra.
d) In case, the petitioner's society is not willing to accept the offer of the
respondents, the respondents are at liberty to award the contract to the
Highest Bidder.
10.With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
22.03.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
TM
Note: Issue order copy on 23.03.2022.
Note:In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy,
shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant
concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
To
1.The Secretary,
Animal Husbandry Dairying and
Fisheries (FS-6) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Fisheries,
3rd Floor,
Integrated Animal Husbandry Dairying and
Fisheries (FS-6) Department,
Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035.
3.The Assistant Director of Fisheries,
(Inland Fisheries),
16/2, Samadu Palli Street,
Kaja Nagar, Thiruchirappalli – 620 020.
4.The Assistant Engineer,
O/o. Assistant Engineer,
Water Re-source Department – Irrigation Division,
Lalgudi, Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
TM
W.P.(MD)No.4992 of 2022
22.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
