Reinstate Fishing Ban At ‘Teliya Talab’, Collector Can’t Stay A Resolution Already Implemented By Municipal Council: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently upheld the fishing ban imposed by Mandsaur Municipal Council at Teliya Talab after quashing the District Collector’s direction for a review of the Council's resolution and grant of fishing patta. After perusing Section 323 of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (power of Collector to suspend execution of a council's resolution) invoked by the...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently upheld the fishing ban imposed by Mandsaur Municipal Council at Teliya Talab after quashing the District Collector’s direction for a review of the Council's resolution and grant of fishing patta.
After perusing Section 323 of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (power of Collector to suspend execution of a council's resolution) invoked by the District Collector, the Bench pointed out that the first resolution was in force for over five years since 2012.
“….it can be seen that the Collector could have passed the order of suspension only if the action/order/resolution is yet to be completed/executed/implemented. In the present case, the resolution dated 08.11.2012 was already executed and was in force for at least five years... It is also not known as to how the Collector has formed an opinion that the resolution of the Municipal Council is not in conformity with law or with the rules or bye-laws made thereunder”, the court noted after referring to the interpretation of Section 323 in Devendra Kumar Paliwal v. State of M.P. & Others (2008).
The Division Bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Pranay Verma also opined that the local authorities are best placed to make a call regarding the fishing ban after giving due regard to public sentiments. It was added that merely because hundreds of fishermen may be deprived of their livelihood due to such prohibition was not reason enough for the District Collector to impose a stay on the Council’s resolution.
Pertinently, ‘Teliya Talab’ (lake) is situated in Mandsaur town and is known for its significance in the realms of religion and tourism. Various Hindu temples and ashrams are located on the banks of ‘Teliya Talab’, visited by lakhs of devotees annually. After several representations were made by various religious communities, Mandsaur Municipal Council imposed a ban on the grant of fishing rights at Teliya Talab in November, 2012.
After its due implementation, in 2017, the District Collector cited the State’s fishing policy [Madhya Pradesh Matsya Palan Ki Niti] and urged the Council to review its 2012 resolution as well as grant fishing pattas. However, the Municipal Council, vide another resolution in July 2018, affirmed its earlier decision.
Pursuant to this, the Collector suspended both resolutions passed by the Council and directed it to grant pattas for fishing as per the State policy. Aggrieved by the said order and the appellate order passed by Addl. Commissioner, Ujjain in 2020, the public interest litigation was preferred by a doctor before the High Court.
While quashing the aforesaid orders, the Division Bench observed that the Collector had not accorded any reasons for exercising power under Section 323 of the Act though the provision specifically stipulates that ‘the resolution of the Council can be stayed only if it is detrimental to the interests of Council or the public or is causing or likely to cause injury or annoyance to the public or any class or body of persons or is likely to lead to a breach of the peace and not otherwise’.
“…Admittedly, the fishing policy is not a statutory policy, but is merely a guideline. The local authorities are the best person to impose ban at the behest of the public sentiments. The Collector has definitely acted beyond the powers and jurisdiction”, the court added.
Additionally, the court mentioned that the State government acted beyond its powers by affirming the impugned orders in December, 2020, which had been stayed by the court in March, 2020.
Advocate Nitin Phadke appeared for the petitioner-doctor
Addl. Advocate General Anand Soni appeared for the respondent-State
Senior Counsel Veer Kumar Jain with Advocate Divyansh Luniya represented Mandsaur Municipal Council
Case Title: Dr. Dinesh Kumar Joshi v. The State of Madhya Pradesh through the Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development & Ors., Writ Petition No. 5043/2020
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP)