The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 35146 of 2023 Ratikanta Dey ..... Collector, Balasore & Ors. ..... -versus- Petitioner Mr. B. Baug, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. G.R. Sahoo, Advocate Opposite Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA Mr. A.C. Behera, Advocate (Opp. Party Nos.4 & 5) Mr. S.S. Rao, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. A.A. Mishra, Advocate (Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8)
Legal Reasoning
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY CORAM:
Decision
ORDER 22.04.2025 Order No. 07 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. B. Baug, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner along with Mr. G.R. Sahoo, learned counsel, Mr. A. Tripathy, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State, Mr. A.C. Behera, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party Nos. 4 & 5 and Mr. S.S. Rao, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 along with Mr. A.A. Mishra, learned counsel. Counter affidavit filed by Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 in Court be kept in record. 3. This writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to allow this I.A. and thereafter be further pleased to restrain the Opposite Page 1 of 4. Party Nos.4 to 8 from catching any fish from the three tanks of the Petitioner’s village, i.e., Padma Pokhari, Digha Pokhari and Kakudi Pokhari during pendency of the writ petition before this Hon’ble Court. And for this act of your kindness, the petitioner shall remain ever pray.” 4. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that without going for any auction of the three ponds in question namely Kakudi Pokhari, Digi Pokhari and Padma Pokhari in Putura Gram Panchayat under Basta block of Balasore district, when the Gram Panchayat allowed Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 to rear fish in the three ponds in question, the present writ petition was filed challenging such action of the Gram Panchayat. 4.1. It is also contended that for the purpose of auction of three ponds though a notice was issued by the Gram Panchayat on 19.07.2023 under Annexure-1, but no action was held in terms of the said notice. However, all the three ponds were settled in favour of Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 by the Gram Panchayat in a clandestine manner. It is accordingly contended that since in terms of Annexure-1, no public auction was held on the date fixed, settlement of three ponds in favour of Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 is not sustainable in the eye of law and it requires interference of this Court. 5. Mr. S.S. Rao, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 on the other hand basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed in Court, contended that pursuant to the auction held in terms of Annexure-1, Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 having been declared as the successful bidders, the Sarpanch accepted the required bid money from Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8. However, no receipt was issued with execution of the lease agreement settling the three ponds in favour of Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8. Page 2 of 4. 5.1. It is contended that after acceptance of the bid money, Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 were allowed to take possessions of the three ponds and are continuing in possession over the same as on date. It is further contended that this Court vide order dtd.02.11.2023 while issuing notice to the matter not only passed an order of status quo to be maintained in respect of all the three ponds, but also vide another order passed on 07.02.2024, permitted Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 to rear the fish from two ponds namely Kakudi Pokhari & Padma Pokhari. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 be permitted to rear the fish from Kakudi Pokhari & Padma Pokhari this year also. 6. Mr. A.C. Behera, learned counsel appearing for the Gram Panchayat on the other hand seriously disputed the stand taken by the learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8. 7. Basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit filed by Opp. Party No. 5, it is contended that pursuant to Annexure-1 notice, the ponds in question were never settled in favour of Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 with due acceptance of any bid money, as auction fixed to 27.07.2023 was postponed due to unavoidable circumstances. Such postponement of the auction was also intimated to the B.D.O. and no fresh date of auction has been fixed. It is accordingly contended that since Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8 were never settled with the three ponds, they are not entitled to rear the fish from the two ponds in question i.e. Kakudi Pokhari & Padma Pokhari. 8. Mr. A. Tripathy, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that since the dispute is inter se in between the Gram Panchayat and Petitioner vis-(cid:224)-vis Opp. Party Nos. 6 to 8, this Court can pass appropriate order basing on the materials available on the record. Page 3 of 4. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submission made and taking into account the nature of order passed by this Court on 02.11.2023 and 07.02.2204, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs the Gram Panchayat to go for fresh auction of all the three ponds in question by issuing notice. The auction be held in accordance with law in which this Court expresses no opinion. 9.1. However, since Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 were permitted to rear the fish in terms of order dtd.07.02.2024, which was never assailed by the Gram Panchayat or by the Petitioner, this Court for the present year also permits Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 to rear the fish from Kakudi Pokhari and Padma Pokhari. After such rearing of the fish, Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 will have no further right over the ponds in question. 9.2. However, considering the further submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 that while rearing the fish pursuant to order dtd.07.02.2024, there was law and order problem, this Court directs the local police station to provide necessary protection to Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 on the date of rearing of fish from two of the ponds namely Kakudi Pokhari and Padma Pokhari, if any approach is made in that regard. This Court directs Opp. Party Nos. 6 & 7 to compete the rearing of the fish by 10th May, 2025 without fail. 10. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Sneha Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 30-Apr-2025 18:12:12 (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Page 4 of 4.