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. 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 esaA 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 (1st/2nd) (1st year) Rs. 17,12,040/- Deposited 1st Installment + Rs. 85,275/-= Patna High Court CWJC No.162 of 2025 dt.27-07-2026 7/15 Total= 17,97,315/- (2nd year) Rs. 16,26,763 2nd Installment dues 2. 2024-2025 Rs. 34,24,078/- 1st and 2nd installment (1st & 2nd year) 3. 2025-2026 Rs. 17, 12,039/- Dues 1st installment 1st 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