SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3328

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
V. Shanthi - Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu - Respondent
W.P. No. 25128 of 2021, W.M.P. No. 26491 of 2021
Decided On : 04-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : N. Baskaran
For the Respondents: A. Selvendran, S. Vanchinathan

The court affirmed that inherited fishing rights, established by a court auction, cannot be overridden by public auction notices under inapplicable government orders.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 2000 - G.O.Ms.No.16, Public Works Department, dated 14.01.2011 - Fishery rights - The petitioner challenged the public auction notice for the Periyur Periyakulam tank, asserting inherited fishing rights established by a court auction sale certificate dated 31.08.1942. The respondents argued public interest in auctioning the tank. The court found the Government Order inapplicable to the tank, affirming the petitioner's rights. (Paras 3, 6, 13)

(B) Profit a Prendre - The court recognized the fishing rights as a profit a prendre, classifying it as immovable property under relevant statutes. (Paras 8, 12)

(C) Public Interest vs. Private Rights - The court emphasized that private rights acquired through legal means cannot be overridden by public interest without due process. (Paras 4, 13)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, president of a water users association, inherited fishing rights from his grandfather, who purchased them in a court auction in 1942. The respondents attempted to auction the tank despite the petitioner's established rights.

Findings of Court:
The auction notice was quashed, affirming the petitioner's legal rights to the fishery.

Issues: The main issues were the applicability of the Government Order to the tank and the legitimacy of the auction notice against the petitioner's established rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Government Order did not apply to the tank, and the petitioner's rights, established through a court auction, were protected.

Result: Writ Petition allowed.

ORDER :

1. Challenging the impugned Fishery Public Auction notice in Na.Ka.No:Ko23(4)/U.Po.(Sa)/2021, dated 21.12.2021, issued by the 2nd respondent with regard to Serial Number 6, Periyur Periya Kanmoi situated in Periyur Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tenkasi District, this Writ Petition has been filed.

2. A tank, named, Periyur Periya Kanmoi is situated in Survey Nos. 805 and 806, Periyur village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tenkasi district and the writ petitioner is the president of Periyur Periyakulam Water Users Association. On 21.07.1942, the writ petitioner's grandfather, namely, Mr.Vellaiyathevar participated in the auction conducted by the learned District Munsif Court, Tenkasi, in O.S.No.47 of 1937 and purchased the fishery right of the said tank. On 31.08.1942, the sale certificate was also issued, declaring the writ petitioner's grandfather as certified auction purchaser, since then his father was in possession of the tank and he was doing fishing activities. Fishery patta No.1 and other revenue records were mutated in favor of the petitioner's father and he was paying taxes in his name. After his demise, the writ petitioner had survived him and had mutated the fishery right of the aforesaid tank and the fishery patta in his favor and is continuing to do fishing activities. During the period from 2011 and 2015, the respondents were taking steps to bring the said tank for public auction. Hence, the petitioner gave a representation to the respondents along with relevant documents, not to take any hasty steps in this regard, by bringing the aforesaid tank for public auction. On perusal of the documents submitted by the writ petitioner, the respondents dropped their action to conduct public auction with respect to the aforesaid tank. Even for the present year, the writ petitioner has let in fishlings. However, to his shock and surprise, the respondents are taking steps to bring the aforesaid tank, that is, the Periyur Periyakulam tank for public auction. Hence, once again on 03.12.2021, the petitioner gave a representation to the respondents, requesting not to bring the Periyur Periyakulam tank for public auction. However, even without issuance of notice or cancelling the petitioner's fishing patta, the public auction notice came to be issued by the second respondent vide impugned fishery public auction notice in Na.Ka.No:Ko23(4)/U.Po. (Sa)/2021, dated 21.12.2021 and the said Periyur Periyakulam tank was brought for public auction. Challenging the same, this petition is filed

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by the strength of the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.16, Public Work (W2) Department, dated 14.01.2011, the respondents have issued the impugned notice, by bringing the Periyur Periyakulam for public auction. However, the aforesaid Government Order will not cover the case of the tank in question. G.O.Ms.No.16, Public Works Department, dated 14.01.2011, deals with those tanks under the Water Resources Organization. However, the Periyur Periyakulam tank had never ever been under the Water Resources Organization and the said tank was the subject matter of a civil suit in O.S.No.47 of 1937 on the file of the District Munsif Court, at Tenkasi and the fishery right of the Periyur Periyakulam was purchased in the Court auction by the petitioner's grandfather, namely, Thiru.Vellaiyathevar, in whose favor a sale auction certificate has also been issued by the said Court by sale certificate dated 31.08.1942, on the basis of which, a Fishery Patta No.1 was issued in favor of the petitioner's father and after his demise, the same has been mutated in favor of the petitioner and the petitioner is continuing to pay taxes in his name and doing fishing activities and by the strength of the said G.O., the petitioner's fishing rights over the same cannot be interfered with and pressed for allowing the Writ Petition, by setting aside the impugned portion of the aforesaid auction notice dated 21.12.2021.

4. Per contra, on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top