Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM SARAN RAM versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Saran Ram v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 61999 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 19213 (14 November 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Anjani Kumar, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.2 and 3 to consider petitioner's prayer for renewal of Patta (fishery rights) with regard to pond Khata no.33-K area 0967/2.39 situate in Gram Pancayat Kushaha Brahman (Revenue Village Ratanur) Tahsil Belthra Road, District Ballia.

ii. Issue any other writ order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in fact and circumstances of the case.

iii. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner."

As   per assertions made in the writ petition the petitioner is the lessee of the pond in question. In terms of agreements entered into between the petitioner and the Gaon Sabha concerned dated 6th August 1996 the petitioner has been granted fishing rights in the pond in question for ten years. Clauses 12 and 13 of the agreement, according to the petitioner, give him a right for renewal after ten years of his lease for fishing. A perusal of clauses 12 and 13 of the lease deed clearly demonstrates that no such rights have been conferred under the aforesaid clauses of agreement. In any way as the petitioner alleges if there is a clause of renewal of fishing lease after ten years the petitioner can file a suit for the same and so far as this writ petition is concerned the petitioner has miserably failed to demonstrate that he has any right of renewal of his lease for fishing. In these circumstances this writ petition has no force. It is accordingly dismissed.

Dt: 14.11.2006.

mhu - 61999/06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.