IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11433 of 2010 1. ASHISH KUMAR S/O SURENDRA PRASAD SAH R/O MOHALLA- HATHSARGANJ, WARD NO. 2, P.O.+P.S.- HAJIPUR, DISTT.- VAISHALI 2. HAJIPUR PRAKHAND MATSYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE ASHISH KUMAR S/O SURENDRA PRASAD SAH R/O MOHALLA- HATHSARGANJ, WARD NO. 2, P.O.+P.S.- HAJIPUR, DISTT.- VAISHALI ------------------------------------------------------------ PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR FISHERIES BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT FISHERIES OFFICER CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VAISHALI, HAJIPUR 4. SUNIL SAHNI S/O SHEO SAHNI R/O MOHALLA- ANDAR KILLA (MACCHUA TOLI) HAJIPUR, VAISHALI ------------------------------------------------------------ RESPONDENTS ----------- 3 2.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the State and the counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 4. The petitioner no. 1 who is the Chief Executive Officers of the Hajipur Prakhand Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. was settled one Jalkar namely Mamu-Bhanja from the year 2008-11 in lieu of which Parwanas were issued vide annexure-4 for the period 2007-08 to the period 2008-10. All of a sudden, a notice was issued which is contained in annexure-2 vide letter no. 485 dated 10.7.2010 by which the petitioners were asked to file a show cause and by the same letter were asked to remove all the fishes in the pond by 25.7.2010. Later in lieu of letter no. 485 dated 25.7.2010 annexure-5 was issued cancelling the settlement. In effect the orders contained in annexures 2 and 5 in fact did not give an opportunity to the petitioners to file a show cause and have unilaterally cancelled the settlement of the Jalkar. Undoubtedly the State may have good reasons to cancel the settlement made in favour of a particular society, or an individual, 2 as the case may be, however, the State certainly cannot cancel the settlement without a reason and without giving an opportunity to the concerned party. Annexures 2 and 5 do not disclose the reason for cancellation of the Jalkar, made in favour of the petitioners’ society. Soon thereafter i.e. by letter no. 522 dated 26.7.2007 the Jalkar was settled with effect from 1.8.2010 in favour of the respondent no. 4 i.e. Sunil Sahni. All the acts of the State Government were done within a period of 15 days i.e. issuance of notice, cancellation of the Jalkar and settlement of the Jalkar in favour of respondent no. 4. The principles of natural justice cannot be said to have been complied by merely stating that a party is to file show cause. Reasons must be given for issuing such a notice and a time must be fixed for filing of the show cause and considering it before any action can be taken negating the right of a person who had acquired a right by an instrument issued by the State Government. Issuance of show cause notice is not an empty formality. The authorities are required to consider the show cause and pass an order either accepting or rejecting the show cause. I find that this type of an order cancelling the settlement and subsequently making settlement in favour of a third party cannot be sustained. In the result, I quash annexures 1, 2 and 5 and direct the Director, Fisheries, Bihar, Patna to look into the show cause which is to be filed by the petitioners, within a period of two weeks, on receipt of this order and thereafter pass appropriate orders within a period of two months. The affected party i.e. respondent no. 4 Sunil Sahni may 3 also appear before the Director suo motu within the aforesaid two weeks. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)