JAINENDRA VERMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Shobh Nath Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri Rajive Ratan Chaudhary, learned Standing Counsel for State.

(2.) The petitioner herein claims that he had participated in an auction held in 2018 for settling fishery rights in respect of a pond situated at Gata No. 347 area 1.212 hectares Village - Balapur, Tehsil - Bikapur, District- Ayodhya. He was the only bidder and had deposited Rs.12,500.00 at that time, however, he admits to the fact that the lease was never executed in his favour and the said auction and the bid was never approved by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate as is mandatory under Sec. 61(b) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 read with Rule 57(9) and (10) of the Revenue Code Rules, 2016. He however claims that he was allowed to exercise fishery rights in respect of the said pond and also deposited the requisite money for each year. However, in 2020 the said Pond was re-notified for auction whereupon the petitioner raised an objection and the matter was shelved.

(3.) Now, again vide impugned notification dtd. 12/5/2022 the pond in question has been notified. He says that the advertisement, in pursuance to which he had participated in auction in 2018, was for 10 years. He also invited the attention of the Court to an alleged report at page 25 annexed as Annexure No. 7 in support of his contention.