IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.10141 OF 2009 1. JALE PRAKHAND MATASYAJIVI SWAWLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. TATAILA THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SHIVA KUMARI DEVI, TATAILA, MUKHIYAJI TOLA, DARBHANGA, BIHAR 2. SHIVA KUMARI DEVI, WIFE OF RAM PRATAP MUKHIYAJI, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JALE PRAKHAND MATASYAJIVI SWAWLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TATAILA, MUKHIYAJI TOLA, POST OFFICE TATAILA, POLICE STATION KAMTAUL, DISTRICT DARBHANGA ………………………………………………………………………………PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR, FISHERIES, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT FISHERIES OFFICER –CUM- CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DARBHANGA 4. JALE ANCHAL MATASYAJIVI SEVA SWASLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED, NAGARDIH (DARBHANGA0 THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NAGENDRA SAHNI, SON OF LATE JAGDISH SAHANI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE NAGARDIH, POLICE STATION KAMTAUL, DISTRICT DARBHANGA 5. NAGENDRA SAHANI, SON OF JAGDISH SAHANI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE NAGARDIH, POLICE STATION KAMTAUL, DISTRICT DARBHANGA 6. JALE THANA MATSYAJIVI SAHYOG SAMITI LIMITED, KAMTAUL (DARBHANGA) THROUGH UPENDRA SAHANI, MANTRI, DARBHANGA ………………………………………………………………………………….RESPONDENTS. ********* 4 24/06/2010 The petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.06.2008 passed by the Director, Fisheries by which the settlement made on 31.10.2007 has been set aside. By the settlement made earlier, 24 Jalkars were allocated in the share of respondents 4 and 5, 33 Jalkars were in the share of 1935 Society and 26 Jalkars were allocated to the petitioner Society. The settlement was challenged by respondents 4 and 5 on several grounds, which are as follows:- (a) The petitioner Society had filed the - 2 - application for consideration of allocation of Jalkars beyond the cut off date as provided under Section 7 of the Bihar Fish Jalkars Management Act, 2006; (b) That the petitioner Society had only 35 members whereas the District Fisheries Officer had taken into account the members who were subsequently inducted in the petitioner Society after the application was made; and (c) The 1935 Society is a defaulter and, therefore, no settlement would have been made in favour of the 1935 Society. The Director, Fisheries upheld all the points raised on behalf of respondents 4 and 5. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order of the Director has challenged his order before this Court. Counsel for the petitioner Society submits that there is no violation of Section 7 of the Bihar Fish Jalkars Management Act, 2006 inasmuch as all the societies had applied beyond the cut off date and as such between the parties, there was no question of their being any anomaly or illegality. Counsel for the respondents refers to the order passed in LPA No. 599 of 2008. From the tenor of the order, it is quite apparent that in that case, one of the parties had applied even after the notice and beyond - 3 - the cut off date as fixed by the District Fisheries Officer and as such the Division Bench held that the application of such a party should not be considered. As far as this point is concerned, I do not find any merit and as such, the Director has rightly not considered this point as a ground for setting aside the settlement in question. Counsel for the petitioner Society submits that the Director has erred in appreciating Section 23 (7) of the Bihar Self-Supporting Societies Act. The question of membership of the petitioner Society would necessarily mean that the District Fisheries Officer will have to take into account the number of persons who were members on the date on which the petitioner Society applied for settlement of the Jalkars. Members made subsequent to that date would naturally not be considered for the purpose of allocation of Jalkars in accordance with the number of members of a particular society, which is a relevant fact in allocating the Jalkars to any society. Finally, it has been submitted that the 1935 Society could not be settled any Jalkars by virtue of 1935 Society being a defaulter. Finally, the Director has passed certain directions. I do not see any illegality in the order of the - 4 - Director, Fisheries as far as the directions are concerned in view of the discussions made above. Respondents 4 and 5 have been allowed to continue to utilize the Jalkars for the period 2007 to 30.06.2008. It has further been directed that the District Fisheries Officer will settle afresh the Jalkars from 01.07.2008 with a rider that the District Fisheries Officer will take into consideration the number of members of the petitioner Society on the date on which he had made the application for settlement of the Jalkars. This Court, however, modifies and clarifies this part of the order by saying that the date of registration should not be counted as the cut off date for considering the number of members in the petitioner Society. In view of the facts stated aforesaid and the observation of this Court, the directions given by the Director, Fisheries, Bihar, Patna in the order dated 05.06.2008 are upheld. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)