Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mariyayi Macchimaar Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, a cooperative society of traditional fishermen, filed a writ petition challenging the proposed demolition of their huts located on foreshore land in Vashigaon, Navi Mumbai. The petitioner claimed that its members had been residing and carrying out fishing activities on the said land for decades, and that the respondents, including the Department of Fisheries, Forest Department, and Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority, were attempting to demolish their huts without following due process of law. The petitioner contended that the demolition would deprive them of their right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution. The respondents argued that the land was part of the coastal regulation zone and that the petitioner had no legal right to occupy it. The court, after hearing the parties and the amicus curiae, held that the traditional fishing communities have customary rights to occupy and use the foreshore land for fishing-related activities, subject to environmental clearances under the CRZ Notification, 2011. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's application for regularization of their huts in accordance with the CRZ Notification and to not demolish the huts until a decision is taken. The court also emphasized the need to balance environmental protection with the livelihood rights of traditional communities.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Livelihood - Customary Rights of Fishermen - Article 300A of the Constitution of India - The court held that the right to livelihood of traditional fishermen is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, and their customary rights to occupy foreshore land for fishing activities cannot be extinguished without due process of law and without providing alternative rehabilitation. (Paras 10-15) B) Environmental Law - Coastal Regulation Zone - CRZ Notification, 2011 - Traditional Fishing Communities - The court interpreted the CRZ Notification, 2011, to hold that traditional fishing communities are entitled to occupy and use the foreshore land for fishing-related activities, subject to obtaining necessary permissions from the concerned authorities. The demolition of their huts without considering this right was held to be arbitrary. (Paras 16-25) C) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Demolition of Huts - The court held that the respondents could not demolish the petitioner's huts without giving prior notice and an opportunity of hearing, as the petitioner had been in possession for decades and had a legitimate expectation of being heard. (Paras 26-30) D) Property Law - Public Trust Doctrine - Foreshore Land - The court applied the public trust doctrine to hold that the foreshore land is held by the State in trust for the public, and the traditional fishermen, being a part of the public, have a right to use it for their livelihood. The State cannot alienate this land in a manner that defeats the rights of the traditional users. (Paras 31-35)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, a cooperative society of traditional fishermen, has a right to occupy and use the foreshore land for fishing-related activities, and whether the respondents can demolish their huts without following due process of law and without considering their customary rights under the CRZ Notification, 2011.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's application for regularization of their huts in accordance with the CRZ Notification, 2011, and to not demolish the huts until a decision is taken. The court also directed the respondents to give the petitioner an opportunity of hearing before any demolition.
Law Points
- Customary rights of traditional fishermen
- CRZ Notification 2011
- Section 2 of the Maharashtra Fisheries Act
- 1960
- Section 3 of the Indian Fisheries Act
- 1897
- Article 300A of the Constitution of India
- Right to livelihood
- Public trust doctrine
- Sustainable development
