IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2344 of 2010 1. BAIDYANATH SAHNI S/O LATE RAGHUNANDAN SAHNI R/O VILL. + P.S. - LAKHAURA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN, MOTIHARI CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF ADAPUR PRAKHAND MATASYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., ADAPUR 2. ADAPUR PRAKHAND MATASYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., ADAPUR THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE BAIDYANATH SAHNI S/O LATE RAGHUNANDAN SAHNI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR FISHERIES, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT FISHERIES OFFICER CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER EAST CHAMPARAN, MOTIHARI with CWJC No.2464 of 2010 1. JASBIR SAHNI, SON OF NAGENDRA SAHNI, R/O VILL.LAXMIPUR, P.O.+P.S. – ADAPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN, MOTIHARI CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF ADARSH MATASYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., ADAPUR 2. ADARSH MATASYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., ADAPUR THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE JASBIR SAHNI SON OF NAGENDRA SAHNI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR FISHERIES, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT FISHERIES OFFICER CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER EAST CHAMPARAN, MOTIHARI For the Petitioners : M/s Pasupati Prasad Sinha, Sr. Adv., Depak Kr., Advocate. For the State : M/s S.K. Sharma, GA-5, Santosh Kr. Singh, SC-22. ----------- 02. 11.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners were allowed settlement of the tanks in question by the District Fishery Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, East Champaran, Motihari for the period between 2007-11. Settlement order is dated 28.12.2007. In the light of the settlement order the settlement amount for one year was deposited on 1.7.2007 and the Parwana was issued on 7.1.2008. Later the settlement was cancelled on 10.3.2008, in pursuance whereof the fish operation were stayed by the District Fishery Officer on 28.3.2008. The matter came to this Court and under orders dated 30.6.2008, Annexure-7 the cancellation order was put in abeyance. For the year 2008-09, in spite of the request of the petitioners neither any direction was made to deposit the - 2 - amount nor Parwana was issued. For the year 2009-10 the Parwana was issued after three months of the beginning of the settlement year commencing from 1.7.2009. The District Fishery Officer under letter dated 2.9.2009, Annexure-1 directed the society to deposit the settlement amount for the year 2008-09 and 2009-10, although there was no Parwana issued in favour of the petitioners for the year 2008- 09. 3. It is thus evident that petitioners could not enjoy the usufructs of settlement for the period between 1.7.2007 to 27.12.2007 and 10.3.2008 to 30.6.2008, 2008-09 as also for three months of 2009- 10 and by filing the two writ application petitioners have requested this Court to direct the authorities to refund the proportionate settlement amount. In support of such plea they have relied on the judgment of this Court dated 5.10.2009 passed in the case of Tardih Block Fishermen Self Supporting Co-operative Society Ltd., Darbhanga, 7.10.2009 passed in the case of Patna City Block Fisherment Self Supporting Co-operative Society Ltd, Patna City and 12.1.2010 passed in Jhanjharpur Block Fishermen Self Supporting Co- operative Society Ltd., Madhubani, which is contained in Annexure- 11 series of both the applications. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the petitioners to approach the Director, Fisheries, Bihar, Patna and highlight before him as to how the Parwana was intermeddled for the period 2007-08 and no Parwana was issued in favour of the societies for the period 2008-09 and delayed Parwana was issued for the period - 3 - 2009-10 and request the Director, Fisheries to direct the District Fishery Officer, East Champaran, Motihari to refund the amount already deposited in the light of the direction contained in letter No.330 dated 2.9.2009, Annexure-1 as also earlier deposited on 1.7.2007. The application filed by the petitioners before the Director, Fisheries should be considered and disposed of as early as possible, in any case within two month from the date of receipt of the application of the petitioners along with a copy of this order. 5. The two writ applications are, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)