1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2575 OF 2008 (Sayaki Prakalp Magaswargiya Macchimar Sahakari Sanstha .v. State of Maharashtra and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 22ND SEPTEMBER, 2008 Heard Shri V.K. Gulhane, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. B.H. Dangre, the learned Additional GP for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5. In the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the validity of the allotment of fishing rights to respondent No.4 by impugned communication dated 02.06.2008. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was also eligible for allotment of fishing right since the petitioner/Society was registered society and the tank in question comes within the area of operation of the petitioner/Society. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned order is bad in law. Smt. B.H. Dangre, the learned Additional GP has brought to our notice that the petitioner/Society was 2 registered without following due procedure applicable in this regard. It is submitted that before the society is registered under the procedure, No Objection Certificate from Fishery Department is necessary which the petitioner/society did not obtain and, therefore, the registration of the petitioner/society was de hors of the procedure applicable in this regard and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner in respect of allotment of fishing right was not valid; whereas the respondent No.4/ Society is concerned, it was registered society as per procedure and the tank also comes within the area of operation of the respondent No.4/Society. In the backdrop of the above referred facts, the contention canvassed by the petitioner is devoid of merits. Hence, the petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.