COMMON JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

W.A.(MD)No.1251 of 2020 has been filed by the official respondents in W.P.(MD)No.5485 of 2020 and W.A.(MD)No.923 of 2020 has been filed by the private respondent, viz., FMD-10, Bodi Fisherman Co-operative Society.

2.The above said Writ Petition has been filed by respondent No.1 challenging the impugned order of the Deputy Director of Fisheries, Madurai, dated 03.03.2020, with a consequential direction to conduct the tender afresh. Respondent No.1/writ petitioner was admittedly a Member of the appellant Society in W.A.(MD)No.923 of 2020.

3.The learned Single Judge disposed of the said Writ Petition by directing the Secretary to Government, Fisheries Department, to issue a tender notice in tune with the other directions issued. The directions were given to the effect that after fixing the upset price, tender should be called for and the highest bid amount will have to be offered to the Fisherman Society. Therefore, the said exercise cannot be done before fixing the upset price. The learned Single Judge further found that the fixation of upset price is grossly in adequate and not in tune with the Government Order in G.O.(Ms)No.201, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (FS-6) Department, dated 19.10.2017.

4.Challenging the aforesaid order passed, the official respondents have filed W.A.(MD)No.1251 of 2020 and the private respondent has filed W.A.

(MD)No.923 of 2020.

5.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants in W.A.(MD)No.1251 of 2020 and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.(MD)No.923 of 2020 submitted that the upset price has been fixed in accordance with the Government Order passed by the Government in G.O.(Ms)No.201, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (FS-6) Department, dated 19.10.2017. The Writ Petition itself was not maintainable, as it was filed by the Member of the Society. The learned Single Judge has converted the Writ Petition into Public Interest Litigation and set aside the Government Order passed by the Government in G.O.(Ms)No.201, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (FS-6) Department, dated 19.10.2017, when there is no challenge to the same. Thus, the order requires interference.

6.On the issue regarding the likelihood of Farmers Society being affected, who are represented by the Counsel, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the instructions from the Public Works Department requires consideration and therefore, any right in favour of the appellant in W.A. (MD)No.923 of 2020 is subject to the rights of the Bodi Meenakshiamman Kanmoi Neerinai Payanpaduthuvor Sangam. The learned Special Government Pleader also brought to the notice of this Court about the activities that is going on against the interest of the aforesaid Sangam. The same has been reiterated by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.11 in W.A.(MD)No.923 of

2020.

7.Before us, we have three competing interests. Apart from filing the Writ Petition as Public Interest Litigation, the Writ Petitioner has challenged it on various grounds including the upset price. The appellant in W.A.(MD)No. 923 of 2020 seeks to sustain the awarding of licence with the upset price. The farmers want their interest to be protected. Even among the official respondents, the Public Works Department feels that the auction of the licence affects the farmers.

8.On the finding rendered by the learned Single Judge with respect to the upset price fixed, we are in respectful agreement. The earlier fixation of upset price through the intervention of this Court has not been taken into consideration. We are dealing with the larger interest of the water body, containing 81.43 Hectares. Now, water is sufficiently available. Unfortunately, this aspect was not gone into at the time of granting licence. The order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, dated 05.04.2019, has not been complied with in letter and spirit. The relevant facto