M.Y. Eqbal, J. - (1.) BOTH these writ petitions involving common question of fact and law have been heard and are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) IN CWJC No. 620 of 2003 the petitioner Chaibasa Prakhand Matasyajibi Sahyog Samithi Ltd. Has prayed for quashing the Office order dated 26.12.2002 issued under the signature of respondent No. 5, whereby as per the direction of the Deputy Commissioner the settlement of the tank made in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled/rejected. Petitioners case is that it is a registered Co -operative Society and its area of operation is in the entire Chaibasa Sadar Block. Earlier the area of operation of the petitioner -society was Chaibasa Subdivision. In the year 1992 some of the tank and ponds of Chaibasa falling within the Chaibasa Block was decided to be settled for a period of long term lease. It is stated that petitioner along with other several persons applied for the said settlement but keeping in view of the instructions of the Government 5 tanks of the said block were settled in favour of petitioner on reserve price basis. A copy of the allotment order dated 24.6.2002 is annexed as Annexure -4 to the writ application. Petitioner, pursuant to the said allotment, alleged to have deposited first and second instalments amounting to Rs. 40,560/ -. It is alleged by the petitioner that after the said settlement, tanks were handed over to the petitioner who started investing sufficient fund. However, suddenly by letter dated 26.12.2002 they were informed that the aforementioned settlement of five tanks were cancelled by the respondents.
(3.) RESPONDENTS in their counter affidavit have stated that Narsanda Adivasi Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd. lodged a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner. West Singhbhum, Chaibasa that his Samiti was debarred from taking settlement of Sadar Prakhand by the respondent, District Fishiery Officer. On the basis of Assistant Registrar Co -operative Chaibasa's Memo No. 212 dated 14.5.2002 in which the operational area of the Samity has been wrongly mentioned as Narsanda Panchayat instead of Sadar Prakhand. Chaibasa. By order of the Deputy Commissioner, the Sub -divisional Officer Sadar made a detailed enquiry in this matter and found that allegation of Narsanda Society was true. The enquiry report was submitted to the Deputy Commissioner who after going through the record cancelled the settlement of Sadar Prakhand Chaibasa and simultaneously constituted a committee headed by Addl. Deputy Commissioner. It is stated that before canceling of settlement the petitioner was given notice for their appearance before the Deputy Commissioner on the question of cancellation of settlement. The Committee, after hearing the parties including the petitioner appeared before the committee, held that cancellation of settlement passed by the Deputy Commissioner was absolutely correct. Respondents' further case is that the Deputy Commissioner as Chairman of Fishery Development Agency, power of settlement of tank and cancellation of settlement is vested in him.;