Patna High Court
Ashok Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 20 January, 2025
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14526 of 2023
======================================================
1. Ashok Kumar Singh Son of Late Ambika Prasad Singh Resident of Village-
Pakra, Police Station-Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
2. Hemant Kumar Sinha @ Hemant Kumar Singh Son of Late Mathura Prasad
Singh Resident of Village-Pakra, Police Station-Naugachia, District-
Bhagalpur.
3. Robin Kumar Singh Son of Late Arun Kumar Singh Resident of Village-
Pakra, Police Station-Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
4. Raj Kumar Singh Son of Late Krishna Kumar Prasad Singh Resident of
Village-Pakra, Police Station-Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary of the Department of Animal
Husbandry and Fisheries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Bhagalpur.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
4. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
5. The District Fishery Officer-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Bhagalpur.
6. Smt. Meera Devi, Mantri, Naugachia Block Matshjivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd.,
Naugachia, District-Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sallauddin Khan, Advocate
Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
For the Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Baidnath Thakur, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 20-01-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sajid
Salim Khan, learned SC-25 for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the private respondent no. 6.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
ancestors of petitioners had purchased fishery rights of 2 Jalkars,
namely, Kharnai Nadi and Til Juggadhar from Mr. N.M. Grant by
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
2/10
two registered sale deeds both dated 19.12.1944 (Annexure-1 and
2) and since then ancestors of the petitioners came in physical
possession of the two Jalkars and started fishing rights through
their settlees by issuing Hukumnama. After purchasing the Jalkars,
the names of the ancestors of the petitioners were recorded and
registered in place of Mr. N.M. Grant in the Collectorate of
Bhagalpur as owners and proprietors in the Jalkar Register known
as Register-D and the Jalkars were identified as Tauzi No. 335 and
336. It is further submitted that after coming in force of Bihar
Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the '1950 Act')
Parwana for the year 1964-65 was issued in favour of Machuwa
Sahyog Samiti on the premise that Jalkars in question have vested
in the State of Bihar. The ancestors of petitioners filed Title Suit
No. 23 of 1965 in which the State of Bihar was impleaded as a
defendant along with Machuwa Sahyog Samiti and others for a
permanent injunction against the defendant State and Machuwa
Sahyog Samiti and also for declaration that the right of fishing in
the said Jalkars have not vested in the State under the provisions of
the 1950 Act. Learned Sub-Ordinate Judge, Bhagalpur after
hearing the parties vide judgment and decree dated 16.02.1973
(Annexure-3) permanently restrained the State Authorities and
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
3/10
Machuwa Sahyog Samiti (hereinafter referred to as the 'Samiti')
from interfering with the Jalkars.
3. The aforesaid judgment and decree in Title Suit No.
23 of 1965 attend finality in absence of any challenge and, as such,
the ancestors of petitioners and petitioners after them remain in
physical possession of the Jalkars and exercise their fishing right
through their settlees by executing settlement and the said position
continued till 1990.
4. The State authorities again in 1991-92 issued Parwana
in favour of the Samiti in complete disregard of the judgment and
decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 compelling the
petitioners to file Title Suit No. 31 of 1992 for a declaration that
State of Bihar has no right to settle the Jalkars in favour of the
Samiti and the State of Bihar and Samiti have no right to disturb
and interfere with the fishing rights of the plaintiffs (petitioners
herein) over the Jalkars in question. Title Suit No. 31 of 1992 was
decreed in favour of the plaintiffs on 28.02.2011 (Annexure-4) and
the State Authorities were restrained from interfering with the
rights of the plaintiffs, thus, the judgment passed in Title Suit No.
31 of 1992 reaffirmed the judgment and decree in Title Suit No. 23
of 1965.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
4/10
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
settlees of the petitioners have also filed C.W.J.C. No. 19883 of
2021 for quashing the Parwana issued by the respondent dated
08.11.2021
for the year 2021-22 in favour of the respondent no. 6
in complete disregard of the judgment and decree in Title Suit No.
23 of 1965 and Title Suit No. 31 of 1992.
6. This Court in C.W.J.C. No. 19883 of 2021, stayed the
Parwana by an order dated 15.12.2021 (Annexure-6), thereafter
the settlees of the petitioners started fishing in the said Jalkars but
the respondent no. 4 initiated a proceeding under Section 144
Cr.P.C. and this Court also based on the submission of the
respondents vacated the order of stay dated 15.12.2021 in C.W.J.C.
No. 19883 of 2021 by an order dated 24.03.2022 (Annexure-7)
which led to looting of the entire fish of the Jalkars by the Samiti
people.
7. It is submitted that though the time of Parwana issued
for the year 2021-2022 lapsed but the petitioners have learnt that
respondent no. 5 has already issued Parwana for the year 2023-
2024 in favour of respondent no. 6, as such, petitioners filed an
application under the RTI Act (Annexure-8) for seeking
information about the issuance of the Parwana but no information
was provided.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
5/10
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
authorities have no right to interfere with the Jalkars of the
petitioners as Bihar Jalkar Management Act, 2006 has no
application in the present case as Jalkars are privately owned
Jalkars as has been decided in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965. It is
further submitted that the authorities are defying the judgment and
decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 and Title Suit No. 31 of
1992 and thus are compelling the petitioners and their settlees to
approach this Court. It is next submitted that notices were issued
on respondent no. 6 by an order dated 21.02.2024 and the notice
has been received by the husband of the respondent no. 6, as such,
a jointness application was filed on 24.04.2024. Since jointness
application has been filed, as such, the notices are deemed to have
been validly served and respondent no. 6 now is being represented
by his learned Lawyer.
9. Learned State Counsel submits that a counter affidavit
has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 dated 03.05.2024
wherein a plea has been taken that writ application is not
maintainable as C.W.J.C. No. 19883 of 2021 is pending
adjudication. Further, the Jalkars belong to the State of Bihar as
would manifest from Khatiyan (Annexure-D), as such, the District
Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Bhagalpur issued
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
6/10
Parwana in favour of the Samiti vide memo no. 608 dated
01.08.2023 (Annexure-C) for the period 01.07.2023 to 30.06.2024.
Further, by mistake 13 Jalkars were mentioned in the memo dated
01.08.2023 when there were only 12 Jalkars, as such,
Corrigendum dated 05.08.2023 (Annexure-D) has been issued
rectifying the mistake.
10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners vehemently rebuts the said submission of the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the State and submits that it
absolutely does not lie in the mouth of the authorities to take a plea
that the Jalkars in question belong to the State of Bihar as the State
of Bihar never challenged the judgment and decree passed in Title
Suit No. 23 of 1965 when the State of Bihar was a party.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioners further draws the
attention of the Court to para 13 of the counter affidavit and
submits that a peculiar stand has been taken by the State
Authorities that the judgment and decree in favour of the
petitioners in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 was not brought to the
notice of the State, as such, the State is contemplating to challenge
the same and against the judgment and decree in Title Suit No. 31
of 1992 an appeal being Title Appeal No. 31 of 2021 (Annexure-E)
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
7/10
has been filed and the same is pending adjudication before the
learned Additional District Judge, Naugachia.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioners at this stage
submits that the case was taken up on 15.01.2025 and the State
was directed to seek further instruction in the matter on which
learned State Counsel submits that he had personally talked to the
Collector and after an inquiry a decision has been taken at the level
of the Collector to stay the settlement made in favour of
respondent no. 6 for the year 2024-25.
13. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that this shows the might of the State and the
audacity of the Collector and the District Fisheries Officer-cum-
Chief Executive Officer that despite the instant writ application
being pending adjudication before this Court in which a stand has
been taken that the State of Bihar has been permanently restrained
from interfering with the private Jalkars of the petitioners in Title
Suit No. 23 of 1965 but still the State Authorities continuously are
settling the Jalkars in favour of the private respondent no. 6 and
when the case was taken up on 15.01.2025 and an order was
passed requiring the learned State Counsel to seek further
instruction in the matter and based on instruction it is being
submitted that the settlement made in favour of respondent no. 6
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
8/10
for the year 2024-2025 has been stayed, which amply
demonstrates that the Jalkars were settled for the period 2024-2025
and the petitioners were not even aware.
14. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
since the State till date has not filed any appeal against the
judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965, as such,
they cannot even touch the Jalkars of the petitioners and they
should be directed not to interfere with the private rights of the
petitioners over the Jalkars. It is further submitted that the stand
taken at para 13 of the counter affidavit that the State is
contemplating to file an appeal against the judgment and decree
passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 amply demonstrates that the
State indulges in leisure litigation and does not even feel
embarrassed in taking such a stand before this Court.
15. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private
respondent no. 6 submits that he has appeared in the case on
15.01.2025 and the Jalkars in dispute in the instant writ application
are not the same Jalkars which finds mention in the judgment and
decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965.
16. The said submission of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 6 is vehemently rebutted
by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
9/10
even the State fairly submits that the Jalkars are the same and there
is an order passed by a competent court of civil jurisdiction in
favour of the petitioners.
17. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
Court comes to a considered conclusion that the State by applying
its might is disturbing the petitioners. The authorities without
challenging the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of
1965 are settling the Jalkars in favour of the private respondents
continuously which amply demonstrates that the authorities do not
have any regards for the orders passed by a Court of competent
civil jurisdiction rather it gives an impression that the authorities
throws the order of the Civil Court in dustbin, pleadings made at
para 13 of the counter affidavit borders on contempt for the reason
that the State of Bihar was a party in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 and
the judgment and decree in the said title suit was passed in the year
1973 on contest and the suit was decided in favour of the
petitioners herein and the State of Bihar never challenged the said
judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of 1965 before
any superior forum but then after 51 years a plea has been taken
that the State Authorities are contemplating to file an appeal
against the said judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.14526 of 2023 dt.20-01-2025
10/10
1965 which amply demonstrates the conduct of the respondent
authorities, the less said the better it is.
18. After considering the submissions made on behalf of
the parties, the Court directs the District Magistrate-cum-Collector,
Bhagalpur and the District Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive
Officer, Bhagalpur not to interfere with the private Jalkars of the
petitioners till judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 23 of
1965 is in existence.
19. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid
direction and observation.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
AFR/NAFR A.F.R. CAV DATE N.A. Uploading Date 20.01.2025 Transmission Date
[ad_1]
Source link