Chenna

HC seeks fishermen’s help in Marina clean-up

more-in

‘Their role in the process is significant’

The Madras High Court on Friday sought the assistance of fishermen in its efforts to clean up the sprawling Marina beach in the city.

It said, their role in the process was the most significant because they were the ones who were living close to the beach all through the year.

A Division Bench of Justices Vineet Kothari and Anita Sumanth decided to initiate the cleaning process on a public interest litigation petition filed by Fishermen Care, a non-governmental organisation represented by its president L.T.A. Peter Ryan, seeking better relief during the fishing ban period.

They directed the petitioner’s counsel L.P. Maurya to submit by December 17 a list of the members of the NGO who were willing to cooperate with the Corporation in cleaning the beach. They also suo motu included the Corporation Commissioner as a respondent to the case and sought an action plan from him.

The judges had already raised the issue with the Commissioner D. Karthikeyan early this week when he had appeared in the court in connection with another case. Expressing displeasure over the current condition of the beach filled with filth and dirt, they had insisted on giving it a new lease of life before the New Year.

Relief for fishermen

In so far as the PIL petition was concerned, it had sought for a direction to the Centre as well as the State government to pay relief amount at the rate of ₹500 per day to every fisherman during the annual fishing ban period of 61 days as against a lumpsum amount of ₹ 5,000 being paid for the entire ban period.

Claiming that the relief amount being provided by the State was not sufficient, the petitioner organisation stated that recent studies had revealed that there was no indication of recovery of stocks in the sea during the ban period and that a ban was not a solution to adverse impact caused by bottom trawling.

Accusing the Centre of having introduced bottom trawling through Indo-Norwegian project, the petitioner contended that it would be disastrous if bottom trawling was banned abruptly since the fishermen had invested heavily by mortgaging their houses and jewellery.

Next Story