The Gujarat High Court has left it to the state government to decide whether it wants to allow fishing in a lake in Sabarkantha district, in its order while disposing of a petition. The order has stated that if the fishing contract, which is under suspension for nearly 10 months following protests from Brahmins in a village in the district, is not restored even in that the authority concerned should pass an appropriate order. A state government affidavit stated it feared a “law and order” issue if fishing was allowed in the lake in the Sabarkantha village. The division bench of the High Court of Justice K M Thaker and Justice V B Mayani on December 4 passed the order while directing the authorities to take a decision in 10 days. Till December 13, no such decision was taken. Sources told The Indian Express that the order was made available only on Thursday. The case concerns a contract for fishing in Pratapsagar lake in Sabarkantha district of north Gujarat. According to the petition, moved by Ashaben P Makwana, 35, a resident of Jawangadh village in Sabarkantha district, the state Fisheries Department had awarded the contract following a tender for fishing in the lake in October 2017 for five years till 2022. Meanwhile, some persons from Raigadh village had submitted a memorandum to the district collector opposing the contract. In the memorandum, it was stated that “certain persons belonging to Brahmin community had raised objection against fishing contract being awarded pursuant to advertisement on the ground that their religious feelings would be hurt if fishing activity is permitted in the Pratapsagar lake.” One of the villagers, Hiralal Punamlal Joshi, moved the High Court and filed a public interest litigation (PIL). During the pendency, the district collector in February, 2018 passed an order and suspended the contract with a view that restoration will be the subject matter of the outcome of the PIL. In March, Joshi withdrew the PIL and had also informed the Sabarkantha collector that he didn’t have any objection over the fishing contract. Still, the authorities did not revoke the order of suspension. In August, Makwana again moved a petition as a president of Asha Matsya Vikas Khedut Mangalam Mandal through advocate Subramaniam Iyer, stating that despite withdrawal of the PIL, they are still not allowed fishing. In response to her petition, assistant director, Fisheries, filed an affidavit stating that in September this year, senior district officers visited the site to “have an idea about the actual situation prevailing at the ground level.” The officers found that “If the petitioner is allowed to carry out fishing activity at Pratapsagar lake, there would be serious threat to law and order situation at village Raigadh.” Following the hearing, the High Court has observed that the authorities directly can’t cancel the contract without granting opportunity to the petitioner. The High Court order states, “If the authority wants to take any decision contrary to order dated 24/10/2017 (the day contract was awarded) and/or doesn’t intend to restore said order dated 24/10/2017, then the authority shall follow proper procedure and shall also comply principles of natural justice.”
