Citation: Fisherman Care v. The Government of India Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, 2026 INSC 937
This judgment leans practically in favor of the fishermen, while recognizing the regulatory powers of both the Union Government and the State of Tamil Nadu.
- For the Fishermen: They won the core legal battle, as the Supreme Court affirmed their right to transit through state territorial waters to carry out purse seine fishing in the open sea (the Exclusive Economic Zone), invalidating the practical effect of the state’s total transit block. The Court also came to their rescue by calling out Tamil Nadu’s delayed verification of applications as an illegal “unwritten ban” and ordering prompt clearances.
- For the State and Centre: Both governments also “win” in terms of their constitutional authority, as the Court upheld the legality of their co-equal, autonomous powers—allowing Tamil Nadu to continue enforcing conservation bans within its territorial waters and the Centre to regulate the EEZ through its 2025 rules.
Legislative and executive powers over fisheries are shared and autonomous between the Centre and the States under India’s federal structure: the State has exclusive power to regulate fishing and prohibit gear like purse seine nets within its territorial waters, while Parliament has exclusive power to regulate fishing in the open sea (the Exclusive Economic Zone). Because both jurisdictions coexist without conflict, fishermen are legally allowed to transit through state waters to fish in the EEZ, provided they comply with the central EEZ rules and state transit regulations, and authorities cannot frustrate this right by indefinitely delaying applications or creating an unwritten ban.
In 1983, the State of Tamil Nadu enacted the Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Act, and subsequently issued a Government Order in 2000 prohibiting the use of purse seine nets within its territorial waters to conserve juvenile fish stocks. Although the Madras High Court upheld this ban in 2021, affected fishermen approached the Supreme Court through petitions and applications. They argued that while the State can regulate its own territorial waters, state rules were wrongfully being used to prevent them from carrying purse seine nets through state waters to fish in the open sea beyond 12 nautical miles, known as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
In response to the dispute, the Supreme Court directed the Union of India to form an Expert Committee to study the environmental impact and safety of purse seine fishing. Following the committee’s final recommendations, the Central Government notified the Sustainable Harnessing of Fisheries in the Exclusive Economic Zone Rules, 2025, to regulate fishing in the EEZ. However, practical implementation hit a roadblock when data revealed that the State of Tamil Nadu had left hundreds of access pass applications pending verification, effectively creating an unwritten ban on transit and fishing in the EEZ.
The Supreme Court held that the legal rights of the parties are governed harmoniously by both the central Exclusive Economic Zone Rules, 2025 and the Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Rules, 2020. It directed the State of Tamil Nadu to frame regulations establishing designated transit channels through its territorial waters so that fishermen can safely access the open sea for purse seine fishing. Furthermore, the Court severely criticized the administrative delay—noting that Tamil Nadu had left 226 out of 257 access pass applications pending—and ordered the State to ensure prompt and efficient clearance, emphasizing that failing to process applications amounts to an impermissible unwritten ban.
