1. In this case the petitioner has obtained a rule as to why the order issued under letter dt. 15-4-1983 (Annexure-4) by the Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms of the State Government be not quashed. By this letter, respondent No. 2 has disapproved the recommendations for settlement of two Jalkars, namely, (i) Ganga Jalkar T. No. 406, 20236 Ganga and (ii) Gandak T. No. 306, 160 1/2 (for the sake of convenience they would be referred to hereinafter as Ganga Jalkar) and simultaneously ordered for settlement of the Jalkar in favour of respondent No. 6. the Fishermens Co-operative Society, Bakhtiarpur. From the above statements it becomes obvious that the dispute in this case relates to the settlement of fishery rights and the competition is between the petitioner and respondent No. 6.

2. The relevant facts, briefly stated, are as follows. The Additional Collector, Patna (respondent No. 5) issued a general notice dt. 29-1-1983 for holding bid of the said Jalkar (along with some other Jalkars) on 14-2-1983. As nobody turned up to attend the bid on that day, the auction was adjourned to 21-2-1983. On that day also no bidder turned up, but three Fishermens Co-operative Societies, including respondent No. 6, filed petitions showing their willingness to take the settlement on the reserve Jama of Rs. 1,09,481/-. Undisputedly, the Jalkar in question falls within the area of operation of Patna Sadar Fishermens Co-operative Society, which was blacklisted. Therefore, according to the circular of the Co-operative Department it could not be settled with the said society. In respect of settlement of any Jalkar with a co-operative society other than the local co-operative society there is a circular issued by the Co-operative Department for guidance of the revenue authorities (a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-I to the supplementary affidavit filed by respondent No. 6 on 5-7-1983). The relevant provision for our purpose appertaining to this document reads as follows:-

-

(LOCAL LANGUAGE)

From the above provisions two things are established, namely, (i) the local co-operative society, i.e., the co-operative society within whose jurisdiction the Jalkar falls, is the preferential claimant of the settlement, and (ii) in case the local co-operative society fails or is not eligible to take the settlement then only the case of an outsider society getting it arises. For consideration of their case, they have first to seek the departmental approval. Thereafter, they may get the settlement department-ally or participate in the bid. As already staged earlier, when the application was filed by respondent No. 6 on 21-2-1983, respondent No. 5 had directed him to bring the approval from the District Cooperative Officer, Patna in terms of Annexure-I, and adjourned the auction to 25-2-1983. As on the adjourned date none of the co-operative societies produced the approval of the District Cooperative Officer, as indicated above, the bid was held and knocked down in favour of the petitioner for Rs. 1,10,000/-. The petitioner deposited also half of the said amount. After the deposit was made, the Collector of Patna (respondent No. 4) forwarded the record on 35-3-1983 to the State Government through the Commissioner of Patna Division for approval, as a settlement above Rs. 50,000.00 could be made only after the approval of the State Government. In the forwarding letter the Commissioner not only had recommended the case of the petitioner, but also said that none of the co-operative societies had the recommendation of the Cooperative Department. If is at this stage that the impugned letter (annexure-4) was issued disapproving the settlement in favour of the petitioner and simultaneously directing for making the settlement to respondent No. 6.

3. In the show cause filed by respondent No". 6 the issuance of notice for holding the auction for settlement of the Jalkar on 14-2-1983 is not disputed. But, it has been stated that the State