Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], June 9 : The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday sought a counter-affidavit from the State Government in connection with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a direction to increase the compensation provided to fishermen during the fishing ban period.
In his petition, G Thirumurugan, an advocate and State Coordinator of the fishermen's wing of the Naam Tamilar Katchi (NTK), stated that the Tamil Nadu Government imposes a 61-day fishing ban from April 15 to June 14 to facilitate the breeding and spawning of fish species.
Similarly, mechanised and deep-sea fishing vessels operating along the Arabian Sea coast of Kanniyakumari district are subject to a separate statutory fishing ban from June 1 to July 31, in accordance with the fishing restrictions enforced along Kerala's coastline and other regions on the west coast, he added.
Thirumurugan pointed out that Tamil Nadu exported marine products worth Rs 5,744 crore during 2024-25 and approximately Rs 6,323 crore during 2025-26 (provisional figures).
"Despite making such a significant contribution to the national economy and the marine exports sector, the fishing community remains economically vulnerable during the statutory fishing ban periods due to inadequate livelihood compensation and welfare assistance provided by the government," he contended.
At present, the State Government provides a relief amount of Rs 8,000 to fishermen for the entire 61-day ban period. He argued that this amount is insufficient even to meet the basic food and educational expenses of fishermen's families for two months.
Referring to the higher compensation offered by other coastal States during fishing ban periods and noting that the ruling government had promised enhanced assistance in its election manifesto, Thirumurugan urged the court to direct the State Government to provide a relief payment of Rs 20,000 per month to every registered fishermen's family during the ban period.
When the petition came up for hearing before a Division Bench comprising Justices N Sathish Kumar and M Jothiraman, the government counsel submitted that the issue fell within the domain of government policy.
However, the Bench directed the concerned authorities to file a counter-affidavit and adjourned the matter for further hearing.