Fishing rights re-auction cannot exceed the remainder of the original lease term.

The petitioner-Society had been granted fishing rights in the Krishna River from Arishinagi Village to Ganjalli Village for 2020–21 to 2024–25.

Following allegations that it had transferred those rights to a third party in breach of the lease terms, the authorities cancelled the lease.

In an earlier writ petition, the High Court dismissed the challenge and directed the authorities to re-auction the rights for the remainder of the lease term, while excluding the petitioner from that auction.

The authorities instead granted the rights to respondent No. 5 for a further five years by order dated 5 October 2024.

The petitioner challenged that order in the present petition.

1. Whether the authorities acted contrary to the earlier court order by granting respondent No. 5 fishing rights for five years rather than for the remainder of the petitioner’s lease term.

2. Whether, after the remainder period had expired, the authorities were required to conduct a fresh auction under the prevailing policy, and who could participate.

The Court applied the directions in its earlier order dated 19 July 2024 in W.P. No. 201778/2024, which required a re-auction of the fishing rights only for the remainder of the petitioner’s lease term and barred the petitioner from participating in that auction because of its subleasing conduct.

The present judgment identifies no statutory provision or other precedent as the basis for its decision.

It directs that, once the remainder period has expired, a fresh auction be conducted in accordance with the prevailing policy and law.

The earlier order limited the re-auction to the remainder of the lease term.

By granting respondent No. 5 rights for a further five years, the authorities exceeded that direction and acted contrary to the Court’s order.

Since the remainder period had by then expired, the appropriate course was a fresh auction under the prevailing policy, open to the petitioner, respondent No. 5, and other eligible bidders.

To maintain continuity pending that auction, respondent No. 5 could continue fishing in the interim.

It permitted respondent No. 5 to continue fishing until a fresh auction is conducted and directed the authorities to hold that auction for the specified stretch of the Krishna River within four months of receiving a certified copy of the order.

No order as to costs was made.