News
Case of alleged SL Navy attacks on TN fishermen dismissed by Madras High Court
Two petitions relating to Indian trawling in Sri Lankan waters came up before the Madras High Court on Thursday.
On, a review petition against an order of a Division Bench dismissing a public interest litigation seeking adequate measures to protect Tamil fishermen from alleged attacks by the Sri Lankan Navy—was dismissed by the Bench, The Hindu newspaper reported.
A Division Bench comprising Justices R. Sudhakar and V.M. Velumani dismissed the petition citing that there were no sufficient grounds to review the earlier judgment, the newspaper said. In an order dated November 2, 2012, Justices Vinod K. Sharma and A. Selvam had dismissed the public interest litigation filed by B. Stalin.
The petitioner had sought surveillance by air force and naval ships along the Indo-Sri Lankan oceanic borders to protect the Tamil fishermen from alleged attacks by the Sri Lankan Navy after the State and the Union governments submitted that adequate measures had already been taken to protect the fishermen hailing from Tamil Nadu.
In their order, Justices Sudhakar and Velumani dismissed the review petition, but gave the petitioner liberty to file an appropriate petition on the matter.
In a separate case, India’s Central Government on Thursday submitted before the Madras High Court that Indian fishermen have no right to fish in and around Katchchativu according to two bilateral pacts signed in 1974 and 1976.
The Centre specified its stand in a counter affidavit when a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) came up for hearing before the first bench comprising Chief Justice R K Agrawal and Justice K Ravichandrabaabu, the Express News Service reported.
The PIL was by L.T.A. Peter Rayan, President of Fisherman Care. It contended that External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid’s statement in the Rajya Sabha—in response to a Calling Attention Notice of AIADMK MP V Maitreyan on the Sri Lankan Navy’s attacks on Indian fishermen—appeared to be in contravention of the 1974 agreement. Rayan said the agreement guaranteed rights to fishermen of both countries to enjoy traditional rights of fishing in each other’s waters.
But the Centre countered that, “Article 6 of the 1974 agreement does not confer fishing rights to Indian fishermen at Katchatheevu and only speaks of traditional rights of vessels, not fishermen. Thus, no rights of fishing in Lankan waters were bestowed under the 1974 and 1976 agreements.”
The case was adjourned for further hearing on Monday.