IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
R DEVDAS, J.
Sri Krishnappa, S/O Dodda Narasimhaiah – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka By Its Secretary – Respondent
Writ Petition No.3477 of 2021(LB-RES)
Decided on : 01-03-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Seeking directions to the respondent - Lease amount or licence amount was already paid by the licensees - Fishing rights granted - Respondent No.2-Village Panchayat passed a resolution to extend the period of license granted to the petitioner herein till 2018-19. However, in the very same resolution, decision was taken to extend the license period - It is noticeable that while the said resolution was being passed, the Panchayat Development Officer raised an objection that such decision would be contrary to the Government Order. Nevertheless, the panchayat proceeded to extend the license of the petitioner - Panchayat did not respond positively, respondent No.4 filed W.P. impleading petitioner herein as respondent No.5 - Petitioner herein sought to deposit the bid amount in compliance of the resolution passed by the respondent No.2-Village Panchayat, respondent No.2-Village panchayat, did not receive the said amount - Petitioner herein also filed another writ petition in seeking directions to the respondent No.2-Village panchayat to receive bid amount. Nevertheless, both the writ petitions – Held, Escalation of 10% compared to previous license fee and thereafter the petitioner has released fingerlings into the lake - It is submitted that when once Panchayat has accepted license fee and the petitioner has released the fingerlings into lake, he should atleast be given the benefit of catching full grown fishes. This submission seems to be reasonable - Respondent No.2-Village panchayat has taken decisions without application of mind - It was its original decision to extend the fishing rights in favour of petitioner without calling for any applications which is intrinsically a decision which is not in accordance with law - Court is of considered opinion that impugned resolutions passed by respondent No.2-Village panchayat are required to be interfered with. Since the license fee was collected from petitioner fishes would have grown, petitioner should be permitted to net the full grown fishes - Petitioner shall be permitted to net the fishes in the lake in question within a period of one month from today - respondent No.4 the same shall be returned to the respondent No.4 within a period of two weeks from today - Panchayat may proceed to call for applications for grant of fishing rights in accordance with law and thereafter affirm rights in favour of the eligible fishermen or society - writ petition is disposed of.
ORDER :
R. DEVDAS J.
The petitioner was granted fishing rights in respect of Bargavathi lake, situated at Uduvege Village, by the respondent No.2-Village Panchayat. The petitioner was initially granted rights on 09.01.2015, for a period of three years from 2014-17. However, it has been pointed by the learned counsel for respondent No.4 that the petitioner was in fact granted fishing rights in the year 2014 for one year and thereafter the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court and during the pendency of the said writ petition, at the assurance of respondent No.2-Village Panchayat, writ petition was withdrawn and thereafter lease was granted for three years. However, the State of Karnataka, Department of Fisheries issued Government Order dated 31.03.2017, stating that the year 2016-17 was declared as drought period and there shall be an extension of one year with respect to the fishing rights granted for the year 2016-17 subject to the condition that the lease amount or licence amount was already paid by the licensees.
2. Consequently, respondent No.2-Village Panchayat passed a resolution dated 09.07.2018 to extend the period of license granted to the petitioner herein till 2018-19. However, in the very same resolution, decision was taken to extend the license period from 2019-2020 and 2020-21 also. It is noticeable that while the said resolution was being passed, the Panchayat Development Officer raised an objection that such decision would be contrary to the Government Order. Nevertheless, the panchayat proceeded to extend the license of the petitioner till October 2021.
3. Being aggrieved of the extension granted to the petitioner, respondent No.4 herein gave representation to the respondent No.2-Village Panchayat, stating that extension could not have been granted. Nevertheless, when Village panchayat did not respond positively, respondent No.4 filed W.P.No.12990/2020 impleading petitioner herein as respondent No.5. Thereafter when the petitioner herein sought to deposit the bid amount in compliance of the resolution passed by the respondent No.2-Village Panchayat, respondent No.2-Village panchayat, did not receive the said amount. Therefore petitioner herein also filed another writ petition in W.P.No.14507/2020 seeking directions to the respondent No.2-Village panchayat to receive the bid amount. Nevertheless, both the writ petitions viz., W.P.No.12990/2020 filed by the respondent No.4 herein and W.P.No.14507/2020 filed by petitioner herein were disposed of by order dated 12.02.2021, on the ground that fresh resolution dated 25.11.2020 has been passed by the respondent No.2-Village panchayat.
4. As per the resolution dated 25.11.2020, respondent No.2-Village panchayat took note of the communication dated 28.11.2020 said to have been made by the Department of Fisheries raising objections to the fact that from 2014-15 to 2020-21 October, fishing rights has been granted to the petitioner herein. The Government Orders stipulate that priority and preference should be given to fishing societies first and thereafter only when there is no eligible society to which the fishing rights could be granted, then the other persons could be granted fishing rights. However, respondent No.2-Village panchayat proceeds to hold that one another society namely Sri.Gangaparameshwari Multipurpose Fishermen Co-operative Society has not produced the required documents. Therefore it was not eligible for grant of fishing rights. Consequently, it was resolved that fishing rights with respect of Bargavathi lake shall be granted to respondent No.4 society herein for a period of three years. Consequently, the office order dated 14.01.2021, at Annexure-J was issued, granting fishing rights to the respondent No.4-Society. The petitioner being aggrieved by the resolution dated 13.01.2021 passed by the respondent No.2-Village panchayat and the office order dated 14.01.2021, has filed this writ petition.
5. Learned counsel Sri.M.R.Rajagopal, appearing for
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.