THE HIGH COURT INDICTS THE MINISTER OF PORTS AND FISHERIES FOR GIVING ILLEGAL CONTRACT FOR FISHING ON EXTRANEOUS GROUNDS
In a significant judgement and order, the division bench of the High Court of Gujarat comprising Ms Justice R.M. Doshit and Mr.Justice S.D. dave squarely held the minister Mr. Purshottam Solanki guilty of granting contracts of fishing lease to certain societies giving them undue favour for extraneous considerations.
The Hon’ble division bench squarely held the concerned minister had usurped the power vested in the competent authority and instead of the competent authority granting the lease as per the written policy of the government, the minister himself granted the fishing lease without asking for the tender.
It was the case of the petitioners Shri Ishaq Mohammad Maradia and another petitioner Shri N.K. Sahani that they were waiting for the tender notice for the fishing lease which was expected to be issued in the month of June 2008. The petitioners who were all engaged in the business of fish trade, however were shocked to find out that the minister had himself intervened and had instructed the Commissioner of fisheries not to grant any fishing lease as per the policy without first consulting him. The minister thereafter contacted certain cooperative societies as well as individuals directly and awarded the fishing contract of around 50 reservoir of areas over 200 hectares each. The lease were granted for prices far below the upset price fixed in the previous contract.
The petitioners suspecting foul play had moved the high court alleging that the contracts were wholly illegal, in violation of the government policy which provided for granting lease only by tender and based on absolutely extraneous consideration. The minister was also added as party respondent. The minister however did not file any reply though the State government contested the petition. The division bench however rejected the defense of the government that the lease were granted to help the poor fishermen to earn their livelihood and held that the minister was squarely guilty of acting arbitrarily for extraneous considerations. The high court therefore quashed and set aside the contract of the lease granted to the respondent societies and directed that the competent authority should follow the process set out in the government policy for granting fishing lease.
Advocates Dr. Mukul Sinha and Mrs. Utpala Bora appeared for the petitioners.
