The Madras High Court’s Madurai Bench has directed the Tamil Nadu government to file its response in a petition seeking an increase in the fishing ban period relief assistance from ₹8,000 to ₹20,000 for fishermen. The petition was filed by Dheeran Thirumurugan from Ramanathapuram district, who argued that the current compensation is insufficient to support fishermen and their families during the annual fishing ban period. The matter came up before a division bench comprising Justices Satish Kumar and Jyothiraman, who sought explanations from the concerned government departments and adjourned the hearing for two weeks.
Every year, a fishing ban is imposed along the Tamil Nadu coast during the breeding season of marine species to conserve fish resources and maintain ecological balance. The Union Fisheries authorities have identified the months of April, May and June as crucial breeding periods for several marine organisms. Consequently, mechanised and trawl fishing operations are prohibited for 61 days. The current year’s fishing ban period is scheduled to conclude on June 14.
Relief Assistance and Court Proceedings
Dheeran Thirumurugan, Ramanathapuram fisherman, Madras High Court Madurai Bench, Tamil Nadu Government
Current relief fixed at ₹8,000, demand for ₹20,000 compensation, livelihood challenges for fishermen, income loss during ban period
Higher assistance reportedly provided in Andhra Pradesh, Goa and West Bengal, plea for parity in Tamil Nadu, election promise cited by petitioner, government terms it a policy decision
61-day fishing ban in force, conservation of marine resources, notices issued to Home and Finance Department Secretaries, hearing postponed for two weeks
During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that fishermen in several other coastal states receive significantly higher financial assistance during fishing ban periods and argued that Tamil Nadu should adopt a similar approach. It was also contended that a commitment to increase the relief amount had been made during the election campaign.
Representing the government, officials argued that determining the amount of financial assistance falls within the policy-making domain of the state administration. After considering the submissions from both sides, the bench directed the Home Secretary and Finance Secretary to submit detailed responses regarding the demand for enhanced compensation.
The court observed that the matter concerns the welfare and livelihood security of thousands of fishermen and indicated that a comprehensive response from the state government would be crucial before further proceedings are taken up.
