LAKHKHI Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE HARDWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issue of a direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned (order dated 9-2-1994 by respondent no. 1 which is annexure 3 to the writ petition and for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no. 1 to 3 not to auction the fisheries right of tank no. 194. area 3 bighas 15 biswas situate in Gaon Sabha Harchandpur pargana Manglaur tahsil Roorkee district Hard war and yet another mandamus directing the respondents to renew the lease in favour of the petitioner for a further period of 10 years from 15-3- 1994 to 14-3-2004 together with another mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the possession of the petitioner over the tank in question and in the alternative to allow the petitioner to take out all fisheries within a reasonable time from the pond concerned.

(2.) A lease for 10 years was issued in favour of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid tank which expired on 14-3-1994. The Additional Disirict Magistrate, Hardwar inspite of the recommendation of the Sub Divisional Officer concerned passed the impugned order dated 9-2-1994 (annexure 3 to the writ petition) asking the Sub Divisional Officer, Roorkee to auction the fisheries rights regarding the tank in question, according to priorities issued by the State Government. The aforesaid order has been challenged on the ground that the Additional District Magistrate does not have any jurisdiction to order auction of the fisheries right either under the Panchayatraj Act or the Gaon Sabha Manual or the provisions of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, Again, the right to grant lease for fisheries in a tank or pond vests in only two authorities, namely, Land Management Committee of the Gaon Sabha concerned and the Sub-Divisional Officer. It has also been vehemently argued that Government Order No. 400/XIII. l-(3) 77 dated May 22, 1981 directed that on the expiry of the period of 10 years if the conduct of the lease holder is satisfactory then the lease may be granted in favour of such lease holder unless there are some persons who have got some preferential rights of such lease. Hence, once the Sub- Divisional Officer recommended the case of the petitioner for renewal of the lease the Additional District Magistrate concerned has no jurisdiction to direct that the fisheries rights in the tank concerned should be auctioned. This petition has, therefore, been filed for setting aside the aforesaid order and for granting the reliefs mentioned above,

(3.) SO far as the decision in Nitiuri v. Additional District Judge (supra) Is concerned it relates to the period prior to amendment dated 6-7-1987 in the Goan Sabha Manual in paras 60 (2) (ka), 60 (2) (kha) and 60 (2) (Kha) (1) and does not decide the question raised in the present petition regarding renewal of the earlier lease.