Authority: High Court of Judicature at Patna

Order Date: 03-07-2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioner – Ramesh Kumar Malo, resident of West Champaran, on behalf of Lal Saraiya Fishermen Refugees Co‑operative Society (116 members). Respondents – State of Bihar (Secretary, Disaster Management Department; Secretary, Animal and Fisheries Resource Department; Director, Directorate of Fisheries; District Fisheries Officer‑cum‑CEO, Western Champaran; District Magistrate, West Champaran; District Co‑operative Officer, West Champaran) and interveners – Dharamraj Sahni (Secretary‑cum‑Treasurer) and Adalat Sahni (Chairman) of Majhaulia Prakhand Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd.
  • Background: In 1956, 15 refugee fishermen families were allotted 348.55 acres of Karmawa Man Jalkar by the Ministry of Rehabilitation. Initial settlement required no rent. In 1985 and again in 1997, the Bihar Revenue Department fixed a reserved jama (rent) which the families paid until 2000. In 2001, the State directed formation of a cooperative society to continue preferential settlement; the society was formed as Lal Saraiya Fishermen Refugees Co‑operative Society.
  • Subsequent Developments: The Jalkar was transferred to the Disaster Management Department in 2007; a reserved jama of Rs 42,000 was fixed for 2007‑08 and a parwana issued on 29‑03‑2008. In 2009 the Disaster Management Department raised the jama to Rs 93,960 for five years (Letter No. 143 dated 06‑03‑2009). The society challenged this increase in CWJC No. 22265 of 2018; the Court ordered the department to hear the petitioner's counsel within 45 days (disposed 13‑01‑2021).
  • Further Transfer: In 2022 the Jalkar was transferred back to the Animal and Fisheries Resource Department (Notification No. 1297 dated 29‑03‑2022). The society, representing 116 members, submitted a representation on 06‑04‑2022 seeking settlement.
  • Intervention: Interveners (Sahni brothers) filed I.A. No. 2 of 2022 and were added as respondents. They argued that under Section 11‑B of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1933 (inserted by Act 22 of 2010), all block‑level fishermen societies merged into a single entity – Majhaulia Prakhand Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd. – rendering the petitioner’s society defunct since 2010.
  • Petitioner’s Contentions: The petitioner claimed preferential rights based on the 1956 settlement, subsequent executive orders (1995, 2001), and readiness to pay any past dues under the Bihar Fish Jalkar Water Management Act, 2006. They alleged non‑refugee fishermen were encroaching on the Jalkar and that the Department’s refusal violated earlier court directions to act reasonably.
  • Respondent’s Contentions: The Department asserted that the reserved jama was fixed by a competent committee on 02‑09‑2022 and that the petitioner’s society had no legal right to settlement because it was not merged with the block‑level society as required by law. The District Fisheries Officer’s report indicated the petitioner’s society had been fishing without title.

Final Outcome

  • The Court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any enforceable legal right or statutory entitlement to a fresh settlement of the Jalkar. It reiterated that a writ of mandamus requires a demonstrable legal right and a corresponding public duty, which were absent.
  • The Court emphasized that executive communications and past settlements are time‑limited and do not create perpetual rights; renewal of a lease or settlement is a fresh grant, not a vested right, unless expressly provided by statute.
  • Citing Supreme Court precedents (Union of India v. S.B. Vohra, State of U.P. v. Lalji Tandon, Akhil Bhartiya Upbhokta Congress v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Sant Ram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan), the Court affirmed that state property must be allocated on a transparent, non‑arbitrary basis and that the statutory framework, not executive discretion, governs Jalkar settlements.
  • Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed with no relief granted.

Topics: Fishermen Rights, Water Resource Allocation