wl\f>^ H1GH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH : BiLASPUR WRITPETITION {ONo. 3110 of 2908 PETITiONER Prathimik Matssya Sahakari Samiti Maryadlt Mongrapali, through the President namely. Rajau Satnaml, son of Dayaram, Satnami, resident of vil!ag© Bagbahra, Distt. Mahasamund (CG). Versus 1. State of Chhattjsgarh through the Secretary, Department of Fishery, D.K.S. Bhawan. Raipur. Chhattisgarh. 2. Director Panehayat Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. ^sistant Dlrector. Department of Fishery, Distt. Mahasamund (CG). 4. Colleetor. Mahasmund, Distt. Mahasamund (CG). 5. Sub DivisionaS OfRcer (Revenue), Mahasamund (CG). 6. Grarn Panchayat. MongrapaSi (s) through Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat Bagbahra, Dsstt. (CG). (Writ petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon'bSe Shri Satish K. AgnihoSri, J. Present:- Mr. V.K.Pandey, counse! for the petitioner. Mr. Bhaskar Payasi, Panei Lawyer for the State. Mr. Satyendra Sahu, counse! for the respona'ent No.6. .ORDER (Passed on thls 6lrl day of February, 2009) With the consent of counse! for the parties. the matter is heard finaily. 2) Learned counse! appearing for the petitioner submits that initjai!y the petitioner was granted iease of the dlsputed pond for fisheries on 20-6- 2007 (Annexure P/9) and thereafter the grant of pond to the petjfjoner for fisheries was cancelied without affording an opportunjty of hearing to the peutioner by order dated 9-5-2008 (Annexure P/1). The petitioner impugns the said order on the sole ground that the petitioner was not afforded an r ^^^^ .^>28€ fc I ^-%t;% 1 Tsj^l ^^^^^^ ';<^s-^-' h11111"11^ Raju opportunity of hearing. The Impugned order passed thereon visits with civil consequences as the petitioner would suffer prejudice on account of cancellation of grant of lease of pond. 3) It is well settled principles of !aw that no order, whlch visits with civi! consequences, can be passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned person. Even otherwise, prejudice has been established as there w'ouid be a ioss to the petjtioner. 4) In view of the foregolng. the order dated 9-5-2008 (Annexure P/1) is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Assistant Dlrector, Department of Fisheries. Distt. Mahasamund, to consider the case afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitiorser. 5) The petitson is accordingEy aSlowed to the above extent. Consequently, i.A.No.1 stands disposed of. —— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge