JUDGMENT : SANJIB BANERJEE, J. 1. The two petitions involved are W.P.No.16797 of 2015 and W.P.No.9159 of 2018, both instituted by an association of fishermen. 2. As far as the earlier petition is concerned, it is accepted on all sides that it has lost its force since a particular notification that was the subject-matter of the petition, no longer survives. However, the petitioner says that certain recommendations which have been made need to be implemented by the Union for the betterment of the conditions in which fishermen operate in this State. Apropos such submission, it is submitted on behalf of the Union that several Committees have been set up successively since the institution of the petition and various measures have been recommended to be taken. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the Union detailing the various Committees and the recommendations. 3. It is hoped that the Centre and the State discuss the matter and put their best foot forward for improving the conditions of the fishermen across the State. 4. As far as the later petition is concerned, the petitioner seeks an order directing both the Union and the State to increase the quantum of dole to the fishermen during the 61-day period that fishermen are not allowed to go out to the sea or indulge in any kind of fishing at all. The State says that the State pays an adhoc amount of Rs.5,000/- per family on an average, since families of fishermen number about five. The State says that it pays Rs.1,000/- per family member for such period. 5. Across the entire coast in the State, fishing activities have burgeoned in the recent times and it is difficult to find a spot, looking out to the sea, without immediately spotting a fishing boat. There are several laws and guidelines in place pertaining to fishing; but either lack of awareness or a crass disregard for the rules make for the fishing activities being conducted without any regard for any norms. At the same time, it is a completely unorganised sector and the State says that most of the fishermen are not even registered. There are several laws and guidelines in place pertaining to fishing; but either lack of awareness or a crass disregard for the rules make for the fishing activities being conducted without any regard for any norms. At the same time, it is a completely unorganised sector and the State says that most of the fishermen are not even registered. It is also evident that though basic housing at some places may have been provided by the State, particularly in the city of Chennai, at other places, there is no support for fishermen and they are left to go about their business, including selling their catch at much lower prices than what the ultimate consumer pays. 6. The State says that it is willing to look into the quantum of pay-out during the 61-day period each year that fishermen are not allowed to venture into the sea. It would also do well for the Union to supplement the amount paid by the State to the sea fishermen families, considering the poor condition in which they eke out a living. Apart from the State Government increasing the quantum, an additional amount may be allotted by the Centre, particularly since the fishermen are kept away from their only means of earning for a substantial period pursuant to the laws made by the Centre. 7. The State and the Centre should undertake a census or an even more broader study to ascertain the number of persons engaged in fishing, so that, in the near future when over-fishing becomes much more of a problem than it is now, the number of persons may be limited. It is also necessary to ensure a degree of awareness being spread, hygienic and other conditions being imposed, apart from verifying the gauges and the kind of nets which are used for fishing. 8. Though, traditionally, fishermen have the instinct to conserve and it has always been the practice to let go of the younger fish or the pregnant, the increasing competition in recent times and the use of certain kinds of nets have led to indiscriminate fishing without bearing in mind that certain species are protected or certain others cannot be caught. 9. Though, traditionally, fishermen have the instinct to conserve and it has always been the practice to let go of the younger fish or the pregnant, the increasing competition in recent times and the use of certain kinds of nets have led to indiscriminate fishing without bearing in mind that certain species are protected or certain others cannot be caught. 9. There is no doubt that several Committees have been formed by the Union and recommendations made, but the task here is to organise an unorganised sector, where most persons may be illiterate and at the lowest rungs of the social order. While housing in a limited form may have been provided to a few, insurance and credit facilities need to be made available, first upon educating the fishermen and next upon organising the sector in the State. 10. W.P.No.16797 of 2015 and W.P.No.9159 of 2018 are disposed of by requesting both the Union and the State to look into the general plight of the fishermen, particularly during the 61-day period ban of fishing, to augment the allowance made available to every sea-fishing family during the period with a possible contribution from the Union in such regard. It is also necessary to educate fishermen in respect of hygiene and presentation, so that in addition to bettering their lives, the beaches become less of an eyesore than they are now. 11. It will be open to the petitioner to pursue for better rights for fishermen by carrying this order to the appropriate authorities. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.4585, 8495, 8498, 22353 and 22348 of 2020 and 6085 of 2021.