IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9571 of 2008 1. DIN DAYAL SAHNI S/O Late Nirsu Sahni, R/O Village and P.O. and P.S. and District- Vaishali. 2. Vaishali Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd. (west) through its Secretary Din Dayal Sahni S/O Late Nirsu Sahni, R/O Village and P.O. and P.S. and District-Vaishali. -------------------Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Director Fisheries Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Fisheries Officer-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Vaishali. 4. Jai Umesh Sahni S/O Late Desai Sahni. 5. Sheela Sahni S/O Late Jogi Sahni. 6. Jadha Sahni S/O Sonful Sahni. 7. Nandlal Sahni S/O Nagendra Sahni. 8. Bishwanath Sahni S/O Dhora Sahni. 9. Dashrath Sahni S/O Desai Sahni. 10. Kahni Sahni S/O Sitaram Sahni. All resident of Village and P.S- and District-Vaishali. 11. Rajendra Sahni S/O Ram Briksh Sahni, R/O Village- Bhagwanpur Ratti, P.S. and Dist-Vaishali. 12. Nageshwar Sahni S/O Late Nr. Sahni. 13. Shree Sahni S/O Ram Briksh Sahni. 14. Ramashish Sahni S/O Ram Briksh Sahni. 15. Baleshwar Sahni S/O Pyare Sahni. All R/O Vill- Ahladpur, P.S. and Distt- Vaishali. 16. Vinod Sahni S/O Khenari Sahni. 17. Khelari Sahni. S/O Bhola Sahni. 18. Police Sahni S/O Balam Sahni. All R/O Village and P.S. and Dist- Vaishali. 19. Lichhavi Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Through its Chief Executive, Sudhir Kumar S/O Rajeshwar Pd. Singh, R/O Vill+ P.O- Chakramdas, P.S. Vaishali, Dist- Vaishali. -------------Respondents. ----------- 3. 3.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the private respondent. The petitioners have been deprived of settlement of the Jalkars (30 Jalkars) situated under 2 Vaishali, Anchal on the ground that the Audit of the society had not been submitted. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they have already deposited the Audit fee to the State Government, however, the concerned authority has not made the audit report on the ground that the petitioners have not mentioned the year for which the fee is being deposited. Petitioners may make appropriate correction by filing an application before the authority concerned. Five year settlement will expire on 30th June, 2011. In the circumstances, it would not be proper to interfere with the settlement made in favour of the private respondents. The petitioner would have the liberty either to get a private Audit done and submit a report, so that it may be considered eligible for future settlement or the authorities may take appropriate steps and carry out the Audit and submit a report so that the petitioner should not be deprived from the settlement for no fault of the society. This writ application stands disposed off. Anand Kr. (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)