IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13065 of 2006 RITESH CHAUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 22.07.2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.12.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Buxar which is contained in Memo No. 25 dated 5th January, 2004 and is contained in Annexure-5 to this application, whereunder the learned District Magistrate has held that petitioner even without issue of Parwana in his favour was fishing in the reservoir for the period between 1.4.2004 to 31.8.2004, as such, he is not entitled for refund of the total amount deposited by him i.e. 93,500/-. Having made proportionate reduction amount of Rs. 35,167/- has been directed to be refunded to the petitioner which is not acceptable to him as according to the petitioner perusal of the order dated 24.12.2004 itself would indicate that petitioner was found fishing in the reservoir for the period between 1.4.2004 to 31.8.2004 on the basis of the statement of the passersby or of those who were visiting the reservoir for the purposes of bathing their cattle but no names of the persons on whose statement such finding was recorded has been mentioned in the order, as such, according to the petitioner such finding is nothing but conjecture on the part of the Collector. 3. Instead of myself considering the submission raised by the counsel for the petitioner, I direct the petitioner to file appeal against the order dated 24.12.2004, Annexure-5 before the Commissioner, Patna Division who should consider and dispose of the - 2 - same in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal. 4. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)