C.M.W.P. No. 36426 of 2012. Case: 'Matsya Jivi Sahkari Samiti' Vs State of U.P. and others. High Court of Allahabad (India)
| Case Number | C.M.W.P. No. 36426 of 2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Kunwar Hans Pratap Singh, Adv. And For Respondents: C.S.C. |
| Judges | B. Amit Sthalekar, J. |
| Issue | Civil Procedure Code |
| Citation | 2012 (6) AWC 5998 |
| Judgement Date | July 27, 2012 |
| Court | High Court of Allahabad (India) |
Judgment:
B. Amit Sthalekar, J.
1. By means of this Writ petition the petitioner has sought a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice/order dated 21.3.2012. The facts of the case, according to the petitioner are that he was granted fisheries lease in the year 2006 for a period of 10 years, i.e., from 15.9.2006 up to 14.9.2016 under Para 60-2 (Ka) of the U.P. Gram Sabha, Gram Panchayat and Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti Manual, on a rental of 1,212 per year. In respect of the lease a registered agreement was executed on 3.12.2006. By the impugned notice, the petitioner has been called upon to deposit an amount of ` 5,000 per hectare, per annum for the period from 15.1.2006 to 14.5.2008 and ` 10,000 per hectare, per annum for the period from 14.5.2009 to 14.9.2016, failing which the lease granted in his favour would be cancelled.
2. From a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that these directions have been issued in pursuance of a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2005 (99) RD 823, dated 29.9.2005.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that his case does not fall within the conditions laid down by the High Court as the said directions apply only to those leases or renewals which have expired and possession of the pond is to be taken by 30.6.2009. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is absolutely fallacious.
4. This Court in the case of Ram Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and others, 2009 (107) RD 557, following the principles laid down by Full Bench in Ram Kumar (supra) has laid down the parameters, to be applied for payment of lease rents in the case of grant of fishery leases. Para 8 of the Judgment reads as follows:
8. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are disposed with the following directions:
(1) In those cases where leases or renewals already granted have expired, possession of the pond shall positively be taken back by 30.6.2009.
(2) All the continuing leases or renewals are cancelled except those where lessees (either petitioner or respondent) offer to pay ` 10,000 per hectare per year for the unexpired period of lease and ` 5,000 per hectare per year for the period of lease till date after adjusting any amount already paid. In some cases learned counsel for the lessees either...
To continue reading
Request your trial