GAON SABHA BARA Vs. COLLECTOR GHAZIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Gaon Sabha, Bara, has filed this petition against the order of the Collector dated 28-6-71 by which he permitted the fishermen of village Bara also to catch fish in river Ganga for local consumption and earn their livelihood, and restrained the Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha from interfering in their enjoying that right.

(2.) THE Gaon Sabha, Bara, tried to auction the fishery rights in river Ganga. This was resented to by the local fisher men and some of them filed applications before the Collector for a direction to the Gaon Sabha to stop the auctioning of fishery rights in river Ganga. The Pradhan Gaon Sabha contested the applications and contended that the Gaon Sabha had in the past auctioned the right and earned good profit. The Collector on a consideration of the matter and after hearing counsel lor both the parties held that the erstwhile Zamindars had never auctioned the fishery rights in river Ganga before the enforce ment of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that, on the contrary, the fishermen had been catching fish free of charge for local consumption. On these findings, the Collector passed the impugn ed order.

(3.) DEALING with the first point, learned counsel has contended that unless specific power had been given to the Col lector to issue an injunction he could not have such a power. Learned counsel for the respondents has contended that the power to pass an order is given to the Collector by virtue of the provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land He-forms Act, the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act and the Gaon Sabha Manual. Under Sec tion 28-A of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, every Gaon Sabha has to establish a com mittee to be known as Bhumi Prabandhak Sarniti (Land Management Committee) to assist it in the discharge of its duties of upkeep, protection and supervision of all land vested in the Gaon Sabha under the provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Aboli tion and Land Reforms Act and under Sec tion 28-B of the Act one of the functions of the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti is to maintain and develop all fisheries and tanks. The same section gives the Samiti a right to exercise all powers of the Gaon Panchayat incidental to the discharge of its duties. Under Section 126 of the Act, the State Government has the power to issue such orders and directions to the Samiti as may appear to be necessary for the purposes of the Act and it becomes the duty of the Samiti to carry out such orders and comply with such directions. Rules 115-A and 115-B of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules have been framed to give effect to the provi sions of Section 126 of the Act. Rule 115-A provides for issuing of direc tions by the State Government to Samitis. Rule 115-B states that the directions on the subjects mentioned therein shall be issued to the Land Management Committee through the Collector of the District and Explanation (1) states that the directions contained in the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti Manual shall be deemed to be directions issued under Section 115-A and that the directions contained in the Gaon Samaj Manual, so far as they are necessary for purposes of the Act and not inconsistent with the Rules, have to be deemed to be directions issued under Rule 115-A. In view of these provisions, the directions contained in the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti Manual and the Gaon Samaj Manual shall be deemed to be directions issued under authority of law. Sub-paragraph (3-ka) of the Para graph 131 provides that in case the erst while Zamindars did not earn any profit by auction of fishery rights of the rivers and water channels, the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti shall continue the practice. When the matter came up before the Collector he passed orders obviously to give effect to the direction contained in the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti Manual. As ultimately it was for the Collector to give consent to any proposal of the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti in this matter, the Collector must be deemed to possess the power to issue necessary and appropriate directions. He cannot, therefore, be said to have acted without any authority of law in passing the impugned order which is more or less of an administrative nature.