Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
V.Dutta Gyani, P.C.Phukan, JJ.
Majorati Min Samabai Samity Ltd. -Appellant
Versus
No.165/166/167/168 Purana Sonai/Chola/ Garanga/Sukhraj Min Samabai Samity Ltd. -Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 387 of 1996
Decided On : 11-03-1998
{'KEYWORD': 'NATURAL JUSTICE', 'SUBJECT': 'SETTLEMENT OF FISHERY', 'ACT SECTION LIST': ['RULE 12 OF THE RULES FOR SETTLEMENT OF FISHERIES']}
Fact of the Case:
The appellant society and the respondent society were both contenders for the settlement of a group of fishery. The settling authority, after considering the records and reports, found that the appellant society had entered into an agreement to sub-let the fishery in the event of its settlement with them, even before a settlement order was passed. The settling authority, therefore, rejected the appellant society's claim and settled the fishery with the respondent society.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the settling authority was justified in rejecting the appellant society's claim as the agreement to sub-let the fishery was a serious disqualification. The High Court also held that the settling authority did not violate the rule of audi alteram partem as the appellant society was aware of the agreement and had an opportunity to explain its position.
Issues: ["Whether the settling authority was justified in rejecting the appellant society's claim for settlement of the fishery.", 'Whether the settling authority violated the rule of audi alteram partem.']
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the settling authority was justified in rejecting the appellant society's claim as the agreement to sub-let the fishery was a serious disqualification. The High Court also held that the settling authority did not violate the rule of audi alteram partem as the appellant society was aware of the agreement and had an opportunity to explain its position.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the appeal and quashed the order of the learned Single Judge. The High Court also quashed the subsequent settlement order dated 4.9.96 settling the fishery with the respondent society.
This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 19.7.96 as passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Rule No. 1178 of 1995 thereby setting aside the order dated 12.1.1995 filed as Annexure H to the writ petition and as Annexure A to this appeal. It was this order which was the subject matter of challenge before the learned Single Judge and as has been rightly noted by the learned Single Judge in the opening sentence of his judgment "the only question involved in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner received a fair consideration! of his case before the administrative authority in the matter of distribution of State largesse."
2. Since the whole argument advanced before us veers round this order dated 12.1.95, Annexure H and submissions based on microscopic view of the minutest factual details have been made. It would not be out of place to reproduced the order itself not only as a ready reference, but it would also facilitate better appreciation of facts :
“No.Fish.l04/84/211 dated Dispur, the 12th Jan' 95.
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
Matter relating to settlement of No.49/51-Patuakata/Chalakata/Bhaluakata/ Morsonai Group Fishery.
Read : (1) The Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon's report No.MRF. 15/89/82 dated7.6.94 in respect of M/s No. 165/166/167/168 (Purana Sonai/Chola/Garanga/ Sukraj Min Samabai Samittee Ltd.
(2) The Deputy Commissioner Morigaon's report No.MRF. 15/89/119, dated 20.12.94 in respect of M/s Majorati Min Samabai Samittee Ltd.
Also : All other relevant documents/records pertaining to the settlement of No.49/51 - Patuakata/Chalakata/Bhamakata/Morsonai Group Fishery.
ORDER
Perused the records and reports it is found that there are three contenders seeking for settlement of fishery in question. The first contender is M/s No. 165/ 166/167/168 - Purana Sonai/Chola Garanga/Sukraj Min Samabai Samittee Ltd the second one is M/s No.l22-Garalu Min Samabai Samittee Ltd and third contender is M/s Majorati Min Samabai Samittee Ltd. The second one is sitting lessee. From the record it appears that the sitting lessee has sold out the fishery to some others which is supported by the report of the Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon. There is also a Court order available in the records which also confirm the subletting of the Fishery Rules and disqualify the lessee from getting the settlement of the fishery.
In view of the above, the prayer of the sitting lessee for resettlement of the fishery is rejected.
The another contender is namely M/s No. 165/166/167/168 Purana SonaiChola/ Garanga/Sukraj Min Samabai Samittee Ltd. Against this society documents are available on the record that this society had made an agreement although not registered with non Scheduled Caste people that the)1 will sublet the fishery in case they get the settlement of the fishery. From it, it is very clear that this society is also mentally prepared to sublet to some unauthorised persons which will deprive the benefit of the actual Scheduled Caste people. Subsequently, it appears that they have put up an application that the so called agreement has been withdrawn and they have been informed the Govt.. This is not enough to make the Govt. believe that they will not do the mischief of subletting in case they get the settlement of the fishery in question. On the other hand, it proves that this society has preplanned to sublet the fishery to others as in done by the sitting lessee during their tenure.
In view of the above circumstances the prayer of the society is also cannot be considered for settlement of the fishery.
The third contender society is M/s Majorati Min Samabai Samittee Ltd. It appears from the record that this society is not the sitting lessee nor has by other fishery under them at present. It composed with 100% actual fishermen as per rule. It is within the area of operation and financial position is sound. The Committee has been constituted properly. As such this society has fulfilled all conditions to get settlement
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
