Arjun Sharma Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Arjun Sharma Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None of the prayed writ reliefs granted; disposal effected by arrangement that the petitioner file a representation with all relevant documents before the Collector, Katihar within four weeks, and that the Collector hear all parties and pass an appropriate order within four weeks thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the list of proposed settlees (Annexure 5) prepared by respondent No 2 relating to the proposed settlement of Jalkar of Gudhali Kundi Fisheries cum Makhana Jalkar is illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and without jurisdiction, and should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the nature of the case and the way it has moved, it would be appropriate that the Collector, Katihar give a relook into the entire matter so that the affected persons ultimately get justice.

Ratio / Principle

A representation attaching all relevant documents was to be filed before the Collector, Katihar within four weeks from the date of the order.

Key takeaways

If the representation is filed, the Collector, Katihar is to hear all the parties and pass an appropriate order within four weeks thereafter.ratio¶30
On that footing the writ petition stands disposed of, without the Court itself declaring the Annexure 5 list illegal or commanding the settlement sought.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (CWJC No.5039 of 2020, Rajiv Roy, J, oral order dated 01-04-2024): Arjun Sharma sought declaration/quashing of the Annexure-5 list of proposed settlees prepared by the District Fisheries Officer, Katihar for the Jalkar of Gudhali/Gadhali Kundi Fisheries cum Makhana Jalkar, and command to settle the jalkar with him and 13 others of the group on acceptance of reserve jama. With counter affidavit and reply on record, and noting earlier DGP directions (closure report; action against local police officials including the Secretary of respondent No 4 samiti), the Court did not adjudicate the legality/mala fides claims; it directed the Collector, Katihar to give a relook into the entire matter, petitioner to file representation with all relevant documents within four weeks, Collector to hear all parties and pass an appropriate order within four weeks thereafter; writ petition disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 5039 of 2020

======================================================

Arjun Sharma son of Late Devi Sharma resident of Village- Laxmipur, Police Station- Pranpur, District- Katihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Bihar, Patna.

Shambhu Prasad Nayak, District Fisheries Officer, Katihar, Bihar.

Pranpur Prakhand Matasya Jeevi Sahyog Samiti Limited, at Roshna, P.S.Pranpur, District- Katihar.

Kunal Nishad, Secretary, Pranpur Prakhand Matasya Jeevi Sahyog Samiti Limited, at Roshna, P.S.- Pranpur, District- Katihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr Yogendra Mishra, Sr Advocate with Ms Swati Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Rishi Raj Sinha, SC XIX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL ORDER

7 01-04-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2 This writ petition has been filed for the following

reliefs:

“(i) An appropriate writ/order/direction, declaring the list prepared by respondent No 2, as contained in Annexure 5, as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and without jurisdiction, be issued;

(ii) An appropriate writ/order/direction, quashing the list of proposed settlees (Annexure 5) in so far as it relates to the proposed settlement of Jalkar of Gudhali Kundi Fisheries cum Makhana Jalkar, be issued;

(iii) An appropriate writ, order,

Patna High Court CWJC No.5039 of 2020(7) dt.01-04-2024 2/3

direction, commanding the respondents to make settlement of Gadhali Kundi Fisheries cum- Makhana Jalkar with the petitioner and 13 others of the group on acceptance of reserve jama, within a time frame, be issued.

(iv) An appropriate writ/order or direction for any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner be found entitled to be issued.”

3 This petition clearly shows the high handedness on

the part of the respondents. From perusal of the different paragraphs of the writ petition, it seems that even the criminal cases that were preferred, the Director General of Police, upon representation, not only gave direction to file closure report, he also directed the SP, Katihar to take necessary action against the local police officials including the Secretary of the Pranpur Prakhand Matasya Jeevi Sahgyog Samiti Limited (Respondent No 4).

4 The counter affidavit and the reply to the counter affidavit are on record.

5 Considering the nature of the case and also the way it has moved, it would be appropriate that the Collector, Katihar gives a relook into the entire matter so that the affected persons ultimately get justice.

6 The petitioner intends to file representation

Patna High Court CWJC No.5039 of 2020(7) dt.01-04-2024 3/3

attaching all the relevant documents before the Collector, Katihar within four weeks from today.

7 If the representation is filed, in that case, the

Collector to hear all the parties and to pass an appropriate order within four weeks thereafter.

8 This writ petition stands dispose of.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

M.E.H. /-

U