logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 1474 print Preview print Next print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : W.P. (MD) No. 2926 of 2026 & W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 2409 & 2412 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
Parties : J. Brinso Raymond Versus The Union of India rep.by its Principal Foreign Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Central Secretariat, New Delhi & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: M. Jerin Mathew, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, K. Govindarajan, Deputy Solicitor General of India, R2 to R5, P. Thilakkumar, Government Pleader.
Date of Judgment : 03-02-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India

2. Catch Words:
- Public interest litigation
- Writ of certiorari
- Writ of mandamus
- Security
- Safety

3. Summary:
The petition under Article 226 seeks a writ of certiorari and mandamus to obtain records of the District Collector’s and Assistant Director of Fisheries’ orders denying permission to use fibre‑reinforced boats for pilgrim travel to Katchatheevu. The petitioner relies on a 2018 Division Bench decision recognizing fishermen’s right to visit Katchatheevu without visas and urging the government to provide mechanised vessels. The Court notes that no prior permission for such boats has been granted and that security considerations justify the existing restrictions. The suggestion to use mechanised vessels remains non‑binding. Consequently, the impugned orders are upheld and the petition dismissed.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 1st respondent in COLREV/2522/2025-C4 dated 12.03.2025 and the consequential impugned order passed by the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.2762/E/2024 dated 06.06.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to provide protection and permission to the traditional fisherman to visits as pilgrims from Tamil Nadu to Katchatheevu through their Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Motorized Vallam within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.)

Dr. G. Jayachandran, J

1. The present public interest litigation is filed seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram, dated 12.03.2025 and the consequential proceedings issued by the Assistant Director of Fisheries, Fisheries Department, dated 06.06.2025, declining the request of the petitioner to travel in the fibre boat to Katchatheevu during the annual festival of St.Anthoniyar Church, and to quash the same

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the traditional fishermen of Olaikuda Village used to visit Katchatheevu during the festival of St.Anthoniyar Church by using their boats and catamarans. Due to change in the political scenario, travel to Katchatheevu is restricted. In the said circumstances, a representation was made to permit the traditional fishermen to visit Katchatheevu by using their fibre boats. The said request has been declined by the respondents by the impugned proceedings citing risk factor.

3. Citing the order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 22.02.2018 in W.P.(MD) No.3308 of 2018 etc., batch, wherein, this Court has recognized the right of the fishermen to visit Katchatheevu during the festival of St.Anthoniyar Church, without travel documents or visas from the Government of Srilanka and the suggestion to the Government to use mechanised fishing vessel to ferry passengers in future, learned counsel for the petitioner would emphasise that until the Government makes alternative arrangements to engage ferry passenger vessels for the transportation of pilgrims, the traditional fishermen must be allowed to use their fibre boats fitted with motor engines to visit Katchatheevu.

4. On perusal of the impugned proceedings as well as the earlier order passed by this Court, we find that permission to use country boats or fibre boats by the individuals to visit Katchatheevu during the festival of St.Anthoniyar Church has never been entertained by the Court or by the Government. Taking into consideration the security of the individuals, travel to Katchatheevu has been regulated by the Government and there cannot be any deviation or exception to the said regulations. The suggestion of this Court made earlier to the Government for using the mechanised fishing vessel to ferry passengers is only a suggestion and not a mandate. It is upto the Government to consider the said suggestion and to implement it. As observed in the impugned proceedings, the concern for the safety of passengers travelling in fibre boats, which are not meant for ferrying passengers, is wellmeant and reasonable. Therefore, the request of the petitioner to permit him to use fibre boat for transporting passengers to Katchatheevu is not permissible. Therefore, the impugned proceedings of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram, dated 12.03.2025 and the consequential proceedings issued by the Assistant Director of Fisheries, Fisheries Department, dated 06.06.2025, are upheld.

5. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal