Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10154 of 2018 ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar Son of Kashi Nath Prasad, Resident of Village Ukhai Poorb, P.S.- Panchrukhi, District- Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Director, Fisheries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Collector cum District Magistrate, Siwan. 4.

The District Fisheries Officer cum Chief Executive Officer D.F.O., Siwan. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):

"for issuance of appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the letter dated 13/4/2018 issued under the signature of District Fisheries Officer cum Chief Executive Officer, Siwan by which 118 Jalkars which were settled in favour of Panchrukhi Prakhand Fisheries Co-operative Societies Ltd., has been canceled showing the reason of unwillingness to deposit the revenue of Jalkars and the petitioner further prays for quashing the letter as contained in Memo No. 304 dated 21/4/2018 issued under the signature of D.F.O cum Chief

Patna High Court CWJC No.10154 of 2018(4) dt.13-01-2026 2/2 Executive Officer, Siwan by which notice has been issued for settlement of 118 Jalkars by way of limited bid/open bid fixing the date of bid in the Office of D.F.O cum Chief Executive Officer which is illegal, unjustified and contrary to the Bihar Fish Jalkar Management Act 2006.

The petitioner further prays to issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to restore the original Settlement of 118 Jalkars in favour of the Panchrukhi Prakhand Fisheries Co-operative Societies Ltd. in the interest of justice and grant another relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled under the law."

3. Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is become infructuous and as such, he may be permitted to withdraw the petition.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as become infructuous.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U