IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10066 of 2008 MAA Tara Matasyajibi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Sohani, Rajoun, District- Banka, through its Secretary, namely Pavitra Prasad Yadav, S/o Sri Umeshwar Yadav, resident of Village- Sohani, P.S.- Rajoun, District- Banka. ..... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Fishery Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Fishery Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Dy. Director, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur. 4. The District Fishery Officer-cum- Chief Executive Officer, Banka, District- Banka. ...... Respondents. ----------- 05- 18.12.2008 Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha for the petitioner, and Mr. Chandrabhushan Prasad, learned junior counsel to Standing Counsel No.23. This writ petition is directed against that part of the order dated 26.2.2007 (Annexure-2), passed by respondent no.4 (The District Fishery Officer- cum- Chief Executive Officer, Banka), whereby settlement of the fishery area known as ‘Thana Pokhar’ situate at Village- Sohani, P.S. Rajoun, District- Banka, to the extent of 19% has been pre-maturely terminated on the ground that the State Government has decided to develop the same as a model hatchery. The respondents have placed 2 on record their counter affidavit and have supported the impugned action. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The admitted position is that respondent no.4 settled 19% of fishery rights of the aforesaid Thana Pokhan in favour of the petitioner for a total period of five years, i.e. 2006-07 to 2010-11. The petitioner has deposited the consideration money for the entire period and Parwana has been issued in its favour. The petitioner is in possession of the same and exploiting the fishery rights. The petitioner has been visited with the impugned order whereby its settlement has been terminated on the ground that respondent no.2 (The Director, Fishery Department, Government of Bihar, Patna) has issued the policy decision dated 27.2.2008 (Annexure-B), whereby it has been decided that certain Pokhars shall be developed as model hatchery. The portion of the Thana Pokhar settled in favour of the petitioner is covered by the said policy decision, leading to the impugned order. 3. On a perusal of the materials on record and consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears that 3 in view of the agreement inter-parties, enforceable right is vested in the petitioner with respect to settlement of 19 % of Thana Pokhar for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11. The same cannot be pre-maturely terminated except for violation of the provisions of Bihar Fishery and Jalkar Management Act, 2006, or for violation of the terms of the agreement inter-parties. The respondents have not made out a case for cancellation of the agreement under the Act or the agreement. No violation has been alleged, that the empowering authorities are empowered to terminate the agreement pre-maturely under certain circumstances. In that view of the matter, it is not open to the respondent authorities to cancel the settlement which subsists in favour of the petitioner. The impugned order is bad in law. It is accordingly set aside. 4. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 26.2.2007 (Annexure-2) to the extent it concerns the petitioner is hereby set aside. It goes without saying that this order is confined to the extent of 19% of Thana Pokhar settled in favour of the petitioner. (S.K. Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/ 4