IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH MONDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 4769 OF 2022 PETITIONERS:

1 THE THOPPIL KETTU SAMAJAM, EDAVANAKKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN-682502, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, K.I. SHAHUL HAMEED

2 K.I SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 76 YEARS, S/O LATE IBRAHIM HAJI, KAKKAT HOUSE, EDAVANAKKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682502 BY ADVS.

MUHAMMED ASHIQUE K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR DEEPA SASIDHARAN P.K.MINIMOLE JAYARAJ REJI RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, FISHERIES DIRECTORATE, 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033 2 THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, ZONAL OFFICE, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682018.

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ZONAL OFFICE, DR. SALIM ALI ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682018

4 THE ASSISTANT FISHERIES EXTENSION OFFICER(BACK WATER), ERNAKULAM, PIN-682018.

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, EDAVANAKKAD, ERNAKULAM-682502.

SRI.APPU P.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

07.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7^th day of March, 2022 The 1^st petitioner is a Samajam formed for the purpose of collective fish farming from different extent of water bodies situated in Edavanakkad. The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the refusal of the 4^th respondent to issue Annual Licence to the petitioners' prawns filtration farm, under the Kerala Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Act, 2010 and the Rules made thereunder. 2. The petitioners state that farming is conducted by permitting water to flow into the farm during the high tide and filtering the water through fishing net during low tide. According to the petitioners, this farming method is conducted at Edavanakkad for a considerably long period. Whenever the 1^st petitioner submitted an application for obtaining Annual Licence, the 3^rd respondent issued only a Summer Filtration Licence. The petitioners state that the farm in question is not suitable for agriculture cultivation.

3. As per Rule 16 of the Kerala Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Rules, 2013, the competent authorised officer has to conduct necessary enquiry and take a decision after getting himself satisfied regarding the nature of the farm. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they have submitted all requisite documents in support of their application for issuance of Annual Licence as per the Kerala Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Rules, 2013, the respondents are taking a stand that only Summer Filtration Licence can be issued. The Assistant Fisheries Extension Officer has given Ext.P9 report to the effect that the petitioners can be granted only Summer Filtration Licence.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the stand of the respondents is unsustainable taking into consideration the ground situation that exists. The respondents are therefore compellable to issue Annual Licence to the 1^st petitioner. It is the further contention of the petitioners that except the 1^st petitioner, all other Organisations conducting the Fish Farming are granted Annual Licence and the 1^st petitioner alone is subjected to discrimination.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the reasons for not entertaining their application for Annual Licence are the petitioners' land is not included in the annual list and that the 1^st petitioner has not produced necessary certificates. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the 1^st petitioner has submitted all the supporting documents including Ext.P7 which are not taking into consideration. Secondly, there is no such annual list to the knowledge of the petitioners.

6. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the licence applied for by the petitioners can be granted only after considering reports from various officers concerned. The Assist