RAM UGRAH NISHAD Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri D.B. Yadav for the petitioner and Standing Counsel, Sri D.D. Chauhan, Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and Sri K.P. Pandey, for respondent -6. The counsel for the respondents do not propose to file counter affidavit. With the consent of the parties writ petition is decided finally.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the order of the Collector (respondent -2) dated 26.02.2014, passed on the application filed by Mustak Ahmad (respondent -6) for cancellation of fisheries patta of the petitioner.

(3.) THEREAFTER , the Pradhan along with four other persons filed another complaint dated 15.01.2014 before the Collector, alleging therein that on the spot along with plot 1192, surrounding plots of private persons also submerged in water. The private owners of the land also use to catch fish from this pond. The water of this pond was also used for irrigation by the villagers. After auction, a serious problem has arisen on the spot. On this complaint a fresh inquiry was conducted and Tahsildar submitted a fresh report dated 24.01.2014, mentioning therein that the portion of plot 1192 for which lease in favour of the petitioner has been granted, is separate on the spot from the land of private persons. Allegations made in the complaint were again found to be false. Additional Collector by his order dated 25.01.2014 dropped the proceedings and directed the local police to protect the fisheries right of the petitioner.