Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
Heard Sri Amar Nath Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 as well as Mohd. Abid Ali, learned counsel for respondent no. 6.
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 01.08.2014, whereby the auction settled in favour of the petitioner was cancelled and a decision was taken to hold fresh auction in respect of fishing rights in the pond situated at Gata No. 174 Ga and 175, village - Sahijani, Tehsil - Kunda, District - Pratapgarh.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of auction, the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.41,250/- and the remaining out of total consideration of Rs.1,65,000/- was required to be deposited by the petitioner within 15 days. The petitioner could not deposit the same. He was issued show cause notice dated 21.07.2014, giving him time to deposit the amount by 31st July, 2014. However, before the petitioner could deposit the said amount, the Patta was cancelled on an application preferred by respondent no. 6.
The Court while entertaining the writ petition, vide order dated 25.08.2014, had restrained the respondents from proceeding to finalise the fresh auction and sale of Pond in question and provided one week time to the petitioner to deposit the entire out standing amount. The petitioner thereafter, deposited the remaining out standing amount within time provided by the Court and was allowed to do fishing work in the Pond in question. The petitioner is continuing thereafter and is doing fishing work in the said Pond till today.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 4, on the basis of instructions submitted that the petitioner in the garb of interim order is continuing fishing work in the said Pond from the year 2014 till today. However, he has deposited Rs.1,65,000/- only which was the consideration amount for one year and has not deposited any amount thereafter. The petitioner was required to deposit Rs.1,65,000/- per year. Since the writ petition was pending as such no fresh auction could be held.
Sri Abid Ali, learned counsel for respondent no. 6 submits that the Pond for fishing rights was settled in favour of the petitioner on consideration amount of Rs.1,65,000/-. However, patta in favour of the petitioner was executed on 28.06.2014, without depositing of the entire consideration amount. The same could not have been done.
We have considered the submissions and gone through the record.
It is to be noted that auction which was settled in favour of the petitioner in the year 2014, for the Pond of ten years. The consideration amount in the said auction was Rs.1,65,000/- per year, it was deposited by the petitioner for the year 2014-15. It is the admitted fact as admitted by the petitioner during course of arguments that petitioner has been continuing to do fishing work in the said Pond till today. However, he has deposited only Rs.1,65,000/- and did not deposit any amount in the subsequent years after 2014-15.
We are of the view that the petitioner was required to deposit Rs.1,65,000/- every year in case he was continuing to do fishing work in the Pond in question. So far as execution of Patta in favour of the petitioner is concerned, we do not want to dwell into the question whether it was rightly executed in favour of the petitioner without there being deposit of entire consideration amount as the petitioner has already performed the work of fishing in the Pond, subsequent to the execution of the Patta. It was incumbent upon the petitioner to deposit the consideration amount of Rs.1,65,000/- per year for the period he has performed the work of fishing in the Pond in question. There is no justification that the petitioner has not deposited the said amount because there was an interim order operating in his favour which was passed by this Court.
The writ petition as such is finally disposed of at this stage with observation that the petitioner shall deposit the entire out standing amount on the basis of consideration of Rs.1,65,000/- per year, which was required to be deposited by him and shall deposit the same within a period of three months from today, failing which the order impugned shall come in operation. In case any amount is deposited by the petitioner during this period, same may also be adjusted.
The opposite parties shall be free to initiate fresh proceedings for holding auction in case they so desire.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 A. Verma