M.KATJU , K.N.SINHA, JJ. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.
(2.) IT appears that petitioner was given a fishery lease from 28.12.1991 to 27.12.2001. The period of that lease expired on 27.12.2001. It is alleged in paragraph 7 to the writ petition that the fishery lease was renewed for a further 10 years from 13.5.2002 to 12.5.2012 (Annexure -5 to the writ petition). He alleged that in pursuance of the renewal, he has deposited renewal fee charge. However, the renewal has been cancelled (Annexure -1 to the writ petition) by the S.D.M. Badaun vide his order dated 9.7.2002. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has approached this Court. It has been repeatedly held by several decisions of this Court that after the term of the fishery lease has expired, there cannot be any renewal but there should be a fresh public auction or public tender after advertisement in newspapers having wide circulation vide Ashok Kumar v. State 1995 ACJ 1066, Panchoo v. Collector, 1999 (1) AWC 817, etc. This is necessary in order to comply with Article 14 of the Constitution. It is surprising that in spite of several decisions of this Court, the authorities are flouting the Court's orders and deliberately renewing fishery leases. It appears that this practice is being done in collusion with the authorities, although it is wholly illegal.
(3.) WE , therefore, again reiterate that a fishery lease can only be granted after public auction or public tender after publication in well known newspapers having wide circulation. Any lease granted or any renewal of lease without such public auction or public tender and without advertisement in well -known newspapers will be wholly illegal.;