RANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and Sri D.P. Tripathi holding brief of Sri P.K. Shukla for the respondent No. 4. No one has appeared on behalf of the Gaon Sabha even though a counter-affidavit has been filed. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. The matter has been heard in the light of the interim order passed on 20.4.2010 and 5.5.2010. The petitioner was a lease-holder of fishery rights over the disputed pond bearing Revenue No. 133 Area 1.569 hectares. The said pond is said to have been settled in favour of the petitioner, the period of lease being uptil 29th May, 2011. It is the said lease which came to be cancelled vide order dated 31st October, 2009 and the pond came to be resettled in favour of the respondent No. 4 on 8.1.2010 that became subject-matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) Mala fides were alleged against the Sub-Divisional Officer who had approved the said settlement in favour of the respondent No. 4 and had cancelled the lease of the petitioner.

(3.) Having noticed all the facts in detail, since the only challenge raised was against the order dated 8.1.2010 approving the lease in favour of the respondent, the following order was passed on 20.4.2010: