M.KATJU,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R.K. Ojha learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.C. Dwivedi learned Counsel for respondent No. 3, Sri Virendra Singh, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 6 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2. 4 and 5.
(2.) THE controversy in this case relates to the fishery rights in river Jamuna. There is a controversy whether the Zila Panchayat, Kaushambi or the Zila Panchayat, Chitrakoot can grant such right. Under Section 256 of the U.P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam this controversy can be decided only by the State Government in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court reported in (1996) 2 UPLBEC 1091. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 6 has invited our attention to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 15746 of 2002 decided on 19.4.2002. In that decision the Division has held that representation may be made by the petitioner to the District Magistrate. Chitrakoot who will decide the matter within three weeks and accordingly the District Magistrate, Chitrakoot has decided the matter.
(3.) IN our opinion, the attention of the aforesaid Division Bench was not invited to the provisions of Section 256 of the U.P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam nor to the Division Bench decision of this Court in (1996) 2 UPBLEC 1091. Hence the aforesaid Division Bench decision is judgment in per incurring.;