IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.162 of 2025

======================================================

Monhi Devi Wife of Mahendra Chaudhary Mantri/Secretary, Sahpur Block,

Fishery Co-operative Soceity Ltd., resident of Village-Parsonda, P.S.- Sahpur,

District- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Animal

and Fisheries Resources, New Secretariat, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

2.The Deputy Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, New

Secretariat, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

3.The Collector, Bhojpur, Ara.

4.The Additional Collector, Bhojpur, Ara.

5.The District Fishery Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Bhojpur, Ara.

6.The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jagdishpur, Bhojpur.

7.The Circle Officer, Sahpur, Bhojpur.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ojha, Advocate

: Mr. Ved Prakash Chandan, Advocate

: Mr. Govind Lal Pandit, Advocate

For the Respondent/s: Mr. Birju Prasad, G.P.-13

: Mrs. Shweta Anand, AC to GP-13

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 27-07-2026

Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the

following relief(s):

“(i) setting aside the notice vide Memo

No. 103, dated 02.03.2024 sent by the District

Fishery Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer,

Bhojpur directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.

17,12,038/ showing dues amount against the

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

2/15

petitioner failing which the petitioner may be

penalized.

(ii) quashing the final notice vice Memo

No.-175 dated 15.04.2024 sent by the District

Fishery Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer,

Bhojpur directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.

17,12,038/ showing dues amount otherwise the

petitioner may be penalized.

(iii) for direction to the concerned

respondents to issue parwana of "Suhiya Bhagar"

in the name of the petitioner as soon as possible.

(iv) for direction to the respondents to

restrain from recover the amount of notice from the

petitioner which she never utilized for fishing for

want of "Parwana".

(v) pass any other order/orders as deem

fit and appropriate by this Hon'ble Court.”

3. The matter relates to “Suhiya Bhagar” Jalkar

Settlement which was settled with the petitioner’s who claims

herself to be the Secretary of the Fisheries Cooperative

Committee Limited, Sahpur in the District of Bhojpur. The

case of the petitioner is that the first settlement was for the

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

3/15

period 01.04.2023 to 30.06.2023 for a consideration amount of

Rs. 8,11,250/-. The second settlement was made for the

remaining period of 2023-24 and a sum of Rs. 17,12,040/- was

to be deposited and the same was paid on 08.11.2023.

4. The letter no. 103 dated 02.03.2024 issued by the

respondent no. 5 and addressed to the petitioner recorded that

the settlement of 31 Jalkars were made for the period 2023-2024

to 2026-2027 and the second installment to the tune of Rs.

17,12,038/- is still pending which be cleared, else, appropriate

step shall be taken for the realization of the amount .

5. The letter no. 103 dated 02.03.2024 is

incorporated herein below for proper appreciation:

ftyk eRL; inkf/kdkjh&lg&eq[; dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh dk;kZy;

Hkkstiqj

Email Id:- dfobhojpur802301@gmail.com

izs"kd]

ftyk eRL; inkf/kdkjh&lg&

eq[; dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh]

Hkkstiqj ¼vkjk½A

lsok esa]

Jhefr eksugh nsoh] ea=h

eRL; thoh lg;ksx lfefr fy0 'kkgiqj

fo"k;%& tydjksa dh cUnksoLrh dk cdk;k jktLo tke djus ds laca/k esa f}rh;

uksfVlA

egk'k;]

mi;qDr fo"k;d lanHkZ esa lwfpr djuk gS fd 31 ¼blrhl½ tydj dh

canksoLrh o"kZ 2023-24 ls 2026-27 rd ds fy, vkids lkFk fd xbZ gS ftldk

jktLo o"kZ 2023-24 ¼f}rh; fdLr½ dk eks0 1712038@ :i;k ¼lrjg yk[k ckjg

gtkj vMrhl :i;s ek=½ vc rd cdk;k gS

vr% i= izkfIr ds lkFk gh cdk;k jktLo ljdkjh [kkrs esa tek dj

v|ksgLrk{kjh dks lwfpr djs vU;Fkk fu;ekuqlkj cdk;k jktLo dh olwyh gsrq

n.MkRed dkjZokbZ djrs gq, jktLo dh olwyh fuykei= okn ds ek/;e ls dh

tk;sxh ftldh lkjh ftEesokjh vkidh gksxhA

fo'oklHkktu

g0@&

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

4/15

ftyk eRL; inkf/kdkjh&lg&

eq[; dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh]

HkkstiqjA

6. This followed the letter no 175 dated 15.04.2024.

The petitioner challenged the two letters by filing the present

writ petition.

7. During the pendency of the writ petition, number of

supplementary affidavits have been filed and though there are

documents to show that long rope was given to the petitioner to

make the payment, one being the letter no. 568 dated

31.07.2025 issued by the District Fisheries Officer, Bhojpur,

the dues that accrued against the said settlement was never

cleared.

8. It is further important to note that though the

petitioner challenged the two letters as recorded above, it never

sent replies to the respondents to the two letters issued.

However, after the filing of the writ petition and it seems on

legal instruction, it responded to the letter dated 31.07.2025 by

informing that no 'Parwana' was issued.

9. This followed the office letter no. 253 dated

10.09.2025 issued by the Collector, Bhojpur, Arrah informing

that no payment is being made though the society is continuing

with the fishing in this Jalkars for which proofs are available.

Direction was thus given to pay the complete amount of Rs.

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

5/15

67,62,981/- to avoid legal repercussions.

10. The letter no. 953 dated 10.09.2025 read as

follows:

ftyk eRL; inkf/kdkjh&lg&eq[; dk;Zikyd inkf/kdkjh dk;kZy;

Hkkstiqj

Email Id:- dfobhojpur802301@gmail.com

izs"kd] i=kad%& 953

ftyk inkf/kdkjh

Hkkstiqj] vkjkA

lsok esa]

Jhefr eksUgh nsoh]

ea=h] iz[k.M Lrjh;] eRL;thoh lg;ksx lfefr yh0

'kkgiqj] Hkkstiqj ¼fcgkj½

eRL;@Hkkstiqj@fnukad 10@09@2025

fo"k;%& lfefr ds lkFk cankscLr lHkh tydjksa dk cdk;k jktLo 7 fnuksa ds Hkhrj

tek djus ds laca/k esaaA

egk'k;]

mijksDr fo"k;d ds lEcU/k esa voxr djkuk gS fd 'kkgiqj eRL;thoh

lg;ksx lfefr yh0] 'kkgiqj dks ftyk eRL; dk;kZy; i=kad 1000 fnukad

15@06@2023 }kjk fuxZr cankscLrh vkns'k lfefr ds orZeku dk;Zdky tks fnukad

01@07@2023 ls 30@06@2027 rd gS ftldh cankscLrh dk okf"kZd jktLo

3424078 :0 ek= gSA cankscLrh vkns'kkuqlkj izR;sd jktLo o"kZ dk jktLo dk izFke

fdLr twu ekg vkSj f}rh; fd'r tuojh ekg rd tek djuk izko/kkfur gSA ijUrq

vHkh rd eRL;thoh lg;ksx lfefr ds }kjk ek= jktLo o"kZ 2023&24 dk izFke

fd'r gh tek fd;k x;k gSA lfefr ds ikl jktLo o"kZ 2023&24 dk f}rh; fd'r]

jktLo o"kZ 2024&25 dk izFke ,oa f}rh; fd'r ,oa jktLo o"kZ 2025&26 dk izFke

fd'r cdk;k gSA tks dze'k% 16]26]815$34]24]078$1712090¾67]62]981 ¼dqqy eks0

ljlB yk[k cklB gtkj ukS lkS bDdklh :i;s ek=½ cdk;k gSA vkids }kjk

yxkrkj tydjksa esa f'kdkjekgh dh tk jgh gSA foHkkx ds rjQ ls

f'kdkjekgh izfrcaf/kr ugha dh x;h gSA ftldk lk{; Hkh miyC/k gSA

ljdkjh jktLo tek ugha dh tk jgh gS tks vf/kfu;e ds fu;eksa ds izfrdwy

gSA

ftyk eRL; dk;kZy; ds }kjk dk;kZy; i=kad 1081 fnukad

17@08@2023] i=kad 578 fnukad 02@08@2025] dk;kZy; i=kad 650 fnukad

19@08@2025] i=kad 864 fnukad 29@08@2025] i=kad 910 fnukad

04@09@2025] }kjk jktLo tek djus gsrq i= ,oa vafre Lekj i= Hkh fuxZr fd;k

x;k gSA cankscLrh vkns'k ds ckotwn jktLo tek ugha djuk ?kksj ykijokgh ,oa

tydj izca/ku vf/kfu;eksa ds fufgr /kkjkvksa dk mYya?ku gSA

vr% vkidks vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd 7 fnukas ds vUnj cdk;k

cankscLr jk'kh foHkkx ds [kkrs esa tek dj v/kksgLrk{kjh dks lwfpr djsaA vU;Fkk

fu;ekuqdwy dkjZokbZ ds vki Lo;a ftEesokj gksaxsA

fo'oklHkktu

g0@&

ftyk inkf/kdkjh

Hkkstiqj ¼vkjk½

(emphasis added)

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

6/15

11. Though the letter aforesaid has not been

challenged, it has been brought on record by filing the second

supplementary affidavit.

12. The third supplementary affidavit records that she

complained to the Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division,

Patna . The further contention is that she deposited Rs.

16,22,750/- on 29.09.2025.

13. The only point raised by the learned counsel for

the petitioner is that for want of ‘Parwana’ for the subsequent

years, the demand is illegal and further they are not doing

fishing activities. As such, original orders need to be quashed.

14. The counter affidavit of the respondent no. 5, the

District Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Bhojpur,

Ara has been filed after service copy to the learned counsel for

the petitioner on 23.09.2025. Paragraphs 13 to 17 read as under:

13. That it is further stated and submitted that

the petitioner have following due of the Government

Revenue from out of Total 31 Jalkars including Suhiya

Bhagar:-

Calculation Chart

Sl. No.

Financial Year Installment Deposited/Not Deposited

1.

2023-2024 (1

st

/2

nd

)

(1

st

year)

Rs. 17,12,040/- Deposited 1

st

Installment

+ Rs. 85,275/-=

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

7/15

Total= 17,97,315/-

(2

nd

year)

Rs. 16,26,763 2

nd

Installment dues

2.

2024-2025 Rs. 34,24,078/- 1

st

and 2

nd

installment

(1

st

& 2

nd

year)

3.

2025-2026 Rs. 17, 12,039/- Dues 1

st

installment

1

st

year)

Total Dues Rs. 67,62,880/- which has to be recovered from the

petitioner.

14. That it is stated and submitted that the

respondent no.5 sent a letter dated

02.08.2025 to the petitioner for payment of

dues in question but not to effect.

15. That it is further stated and submitted

that the answering respondent no.5 again

sent a letter dated 19.08.2025 to the

petitioner but nothing has been paid saying

that the instant writ petition is pending

before this Hon'ble Court while he has

been fishing daily from the Total Jalkars in

question.

16. That it is further stated and submitted

that after knowledge of the aforesaid facts,

the District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara sent a

letter no.953 dated 10.09.2025 to the

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

8/15

petitioner but nothing has been Court.

deposited the Government Revenue as yet

which clearly shows that she is taking

advantage of the instant writ petition which

is pending before this Hon'ble

17. That in the above facts and

circumstances of the case, the petitioner has

knowingly violated the settle provision of

law and she embezzled the government

money Total Rs.67,62,880/- which is dues

upon the petitioner and shows fishing

continuously till date from the Total

Jalkars.

(emphasis added)

15. It is to be noted that the counter affidavit was

handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner on

23.09.2025 i.e. ten months ago and paragraphs 15 and 17 which

records that they are continuing with the fishing activities in the

settled ‘Jalkars’ have not been rebutted by filing any reply.

16. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he

is on technical issue that for want of 'Parwana', no fishing

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

9/15

activity can take place. It has been countered by the learned

State counsel submitting that not only the payments were not

made, they are fishing daily from the said Jalkars thus putting

the State government to great loss.

17. Learned counsel for the petitioner to support his

case drew attention of this Court to the Division Bench

Judgment of Patna High Court in the case of the State of

Bihar vs. Jhanjharpur Anchal Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti

Limited reported in 2016(4)PLJR 553 which read as under:

The only question that arose in this

appeal is that whether the learned Single Judge

was right in directing the State to make

proportionate refund of the settlement amount for

settlement of Jalkar, the settlement of which had

been delayed because of administrative lapse. The

facts are not in dispute. The writ petitioner society

had opted for Jalkar settlement for the year 2008-

09 by the time the settlement order was issued and

parwana issued for exploiting the Jalkar only

about 49 days were left. However, society was

directed to deposit full amount for the entire year.

They thus claim proportionate refund for not

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

10/15

having been able to exploit the Jalkar for the entire

year. The Director Fisheries, for reason not know

necessitated that as the settlement was for the

entire year the payment has to be made irrespective

of the period.

18. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that

the letters in question need interference.

19. Learned State counsel on the other hand submits

that facts have been placed by the petitioner only to their

advantage. The unrebutted facts are that:

i. the settlement was for the year

2023-2024 to 2026-2027;

ii. the further fact is that the petitioner

chose not to make any further

payment

but right from the word go,

they are fishing in all the Jalkars and

the respondents

have proofs to that

effect;

iii. on the one hand, they say that the

‘Parwana’ was not issued and as

such, they could not do fishing, on the

other hand, they paid Rs. 16,22,750/-

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

11/15

in the year 2025 clearly reflecting on

their falsehood as also their

continuous fishing activities;

iv. all the facts recorded in the counter

affidavit has/have not been rebutted;

v. as such, the writ petition is fit to be

dismissed with cost.

20. Having heard the parties, this Court has taken note

of the letters issued by the District Fisheries Officer, Bhojpur as

also the Collector, Bhojpur which talk about the settlement

made for the period 2023-2024 to 2026-2027. It is to be noted

again that the petitioner never answered to the letters issued by

the District Fisheries Officer, Bhojpur which talks about the

settlement upto the year 2026-27.

21. Further, pursuant to the first installment, the

petitioner/society started fishing in all the Jalkars without

making payment when letters demanding payments were made.

22. Further, the flip flop of the petitioner can be seen

from the fact that on the one hand, the claim is that no ‘Parwana

was issued, on the other hand, after the filing of writ petition,

she paid Rs. 16,22,750/- on 29.09.2025.

23. The two letters dated 02.03.2024 and 15.04.2024

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

12/15

issued by the District Fisheries Officer, Bhojpur as also the

letter dated 10.09.2025 by the Collector, Bhojpur clearly shows

that the settlement was made for the period 01.07.2023 to

30.06.2027 but the petitioner deliberately defaulted.

24. The counter affidavit also records that the

settlement was up to 30.06.2027, a fact not rebutted by filing

any reply. This Court has further taken note of this fact that the

petitioner solely is continuously doing fishing activities in the

Jalkars.

25. Some words for the respondents too. This Court is

amazed on the way the respondents have behaved. Here is the

case where settlement was made upto the year 2026-27. The

demand order was made way back in the year 2024. It was

neither replied nor payments made. Further, though belatedly, in

the month of January 2025, a writ petition was filed challenging

the demand letters, no prayer for the early hearing ever made

nor any stay granted in the matter. Meanwhile, they continued

with the fishing activities.

26. In that background, the questions that this Court

has/have for the respondents as to what prevented them from:

(i). canceling the settlement;

(ii). filing appropriate case before the

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

13/15

appropriate authority for the realization of the

amount;

27. This irresponsible behaviour of the district

respondents has/have not resulted into huge financial loss to any

individual, it is the State which has suffered. Clearly, the act of

the respondents in giving long rope to the petitioner is/are not

above the board and an enquiry at the level of Collector,

Bhojpur has to be done.

28. Accordingly ordered. The Collector, Bhojpur must

hold an enquiry not only in the present case but all such

settlement cases of the Jalkars across the district where:

(i) payments have been withheld;

(ii) fishing activities are continuing;

(iii) there being no stay by any Court;

(iii) still, the Fishery Officers have not taken

any steps for cancelling the settlement.

29. So far as the judgment of the State of Bihar

(supra) matter is concerned, it in no case applies in the present

case. In the aforesaid case, the settlement period left was only

49 days but the direction was made for the payment for the

entire financial year. In that background, the Patna High Court

intervened.

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

14/15

30. However, in the present case, the admitted facts

are that since the settlement year (2023-24) till date, the

petitioner society is continuously doing fishing activities in the

Jalkars, a fact recorded in the counter affidavit, copy served ten

months ago and not denied.

31. The facts come first and the unrebutted facts are

that the petitioner/the Fisheries Society she represents have been

continuously doing fishing activities in the said Jalkars and

despite the long rope given by the respondents, they failed to

amend and/or clear the amounts. From the submissions put

forward by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is further clear

that they have no intention to make any payment as no such

submission was ever made to allow them to make payment in

regular installment and/or their case be given sympathetic

consideration by the respondents so far as the payment of dues

are concerned. Thus, the petitioner who are illegally doing

fishing activities without making payment to the State cannot

hide behind the order of the State of Bihar (supra) case.

32. The facts have been recorded. This takes the Court

to only one conclusion. No interference in the present matter is

required. The writ petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs.

5,000/- to be deposited with Patna High Court Legal Services

Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026

15/15

Committee within a month, failing which appropriate steps be

taken in accordance with law for the realization of the amount.

33. The Collector, Bhojpur is directed to conduct and

conclude enquiry on the points recorded by the Court/additional

point, the Collector, Bhojpur may deem fit and proper and take

immediate remedial measures thereafter. The entire process

must be completed in the next three months as the state

exchequer is loosing money due to non-payments of settled

amount.

munindra/-

(Rajiv Roy, J)

AFR/NAFR AFR

CAV DATE NA

Uploading Date 29.07.2026

Transmission Date NA