1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7424 of 2007 TARKESHWAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Advocate for the Petitioner : (1) Mr. Nagendra Rai (2) Mr. Navin Nikunj Advocate of the State : (1) Dr. Md. Raisul Haque G.P. 5 (2) Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, J.C. to G.P.5 03 24.06.2008 The petitioner challenges the right of the State to make settlement of a fish jalkar in terms of the Bihar Fish Jalkar Mangement Act, 2006. Petitioner submits that the said jalkar was created by ex-landlord, the ancestor of the petitioner. After vesting of intermediary interest as per the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, in the year 1977, petitioner’s father made an application to the DCLR for making settlement of that jalkar in favour of the petitioner’s family, as they had been in continuous use thereof. Petitioner’s claim that it was exempted from vesting under the Bihar Land Reforms Act was rejected by the authorities. But, however, considering the fact that the petitioner had been using the said jalkar for a long time, settlement was made with them in the year 1980 on year to year basis. In the said order itself (Annexure-1), it is noted that this jalkar was included in the government shairat register. 2 The petitioner submits that as per (Annexure-1) settlement on year to year basis having been made in his favour, now, under the Bihar Fish Jalkar Management Act, 2006 the same could not be settled with any other person/fishermen’s cooperative. In my view, the submission of the petitioner is misconceived. The reference to Annexure-1 itself would show that it was a shairat duly mentioned in the government shairat register. In the counter affidavit, it is clearly stated that all the shairat in the said district were transferred to the Fishery Department and therefore this shairat is a jalkar within the meaning of Bihar Fish Jalkar Management Act,2006 and that being so the authorities thereunder had the right to settle the same in accordance with said Act. In my view, the stand taken in the counter is correct and cannot be questioned except on petitioner establishing his civil right and title by instituting a proper suit and getting a declaration in accordance with law. Till such time the Court does not find or declare petitioner’s right, the authorities would be competent to deal with it under the Bihar Fish Jalkar Management Act, 2006. 3 Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J.) Thus, in my view, the writ application merits no consideration and is dismissed accordingly with the above observations.