RAMESH TURHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the Bid Notice dtd. 24/7/2023 issued vide Memo No. 1592 by respondent No.5, namely, the District Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah, as contained in Annexure-P/1 to the writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issuance of the said notice of Bid has been made in gross violation of law. According to the petitioner, the said Bid notice has been issued under Sec. 8 of the Bihar Fish Jalkar Management Act, 2006 (Bihar Act 13, 2006) (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2006'). She further submits that Sec. 8 of the Act of 2006 talks about the settlement of Jalkar by limited Bid. According to the petitioner, applicability of Sec. 8 of the Act of 2006 shall arise only in a situation of applicability of Sec. 7 (ix) of the Act of 2006 which talks about the share of the Jalkars of disqualified societies of a block shall be settled for five years by limited bid with the non 'defaulter members of that society residing in the same block where the Jalkar is situated. But only one Jalkar shall be settled with one person. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is not a defaulter. In this regard, a categorical statement has been made in paragraph 16 of the petition in which it has also been stated that Jalkar situated within the operational area of the society is to be settled with a non-defaulter society and as such issuance of bid under Sec. 8 of the Act of 2006 is bad in law.