JUDGMENT R.M. Sahai, J. - The petitioner, bhumidhar of plot numbers 162, and 155 has approached this Court for quashing of order dated 30th April, 1988 passed by Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parishad, as the order refusing to grant permission to petitioner to hold cattle fair and cattle Market on his own land is contrary to the bye - laws and is based on irrelevant considerations. 2. Admittedly, the Zila Parishad granted a licence in favour of petitioner on 2nd December, 1987 for holding a cattle market on Wednesday and Sunday and a cattle fair for 13 days from Asharh Sudi Parwa to Sharavan Badi Parwa. In March 1988, the licence was suspended on interference of State Government against which petitioner came to this Court by way of writ petition No. 722 of 1988 which was disposed of at the admission stage and a direction was issued to the Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parished to decide die application afresh after giving an opportunity lo petitioner and opposite party who holds cattle market and cattle fair in the vicinity and decide if there was any clash between the days of two cattle market. The bench observed : "If he finds that there is no clash of days the petitioner's application for renewal of the right to run the cattle fair shall be determined and decided in accordance with law." In pursuance of this direction the Mukhya Adhikari passed the impugned order. The Principal basis for rejecting petitioner's application for removal is that in case petitioner is granted a licence to hold cattle market on Wednesday and Sunday then it shall clash with the days on which cattle fair is hold by opposite party. 3. Law on this aspect has been settled by a series of decisions of this Court. Right of a Bhumidhar to use his land in a manner in which he considers appropriate cannot be disputed. But this right can be regulated in public interest. For instance the authorities may not grant licence if the holding of another market or fair may create law and order problem. Guidelines issued in this regard permit grant of another licence if distance between the two plots is four kilometers. But this right can be regulated in public interest. For instance the authorities may not grant licence if the holding of another market or fair may create law and order problem. Guidelines issued in this regard permit grant of another licence if distance between the two plots is four kilometers. This too can be waived if the days of holding cattle market or fair is different and there is no likelihood of breach of peaces, bye - laws of Zila Parishad provide for obtaining of licence and registration only. it does not lay down the circumstances in which permission can be refused. Therefore, except the law and order problem the opposite party could not refuse the permission to petitioner to hold cattle market or cattle fair in this own land. Obviously because such a provision would have violated fundamental right guaranteed to a citizen under Article 19 of the Constitution. 4. The opposite party has licence to hold its cattle market on Tuesday and Friday of every week whereas licence in favour of petitioner permitted him to held the market on Wednesday and Sunday. There could thus be no clash in holding the cattle market by petitioner and opposite party. The Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parishad, therefore, committed an error of law is assuming clash on these days. Even the reasoning given by him that there shall be a clash if petitioner holds cattle market on Wednesday and Sunday which may fell during the days of cattle fair does not appear to be sound in law. The anxiety of the authorities is such matters is to maintain law and order. The guidelines provided by the bye - laws is also to the same effect. Therefore, the primary consideration should have been to avoid every likelihood of apprehension of breach of peace and not to perpetrate right in favour of one by creating monopoly in his favour. No action of the authorities should result in benefit to one and loss to other. It should be so balanced that neither parties should suffer and there is no apprehension of breach of peace. It is true that if the cattle market is held by one or the other party on the days when cattle fair is held a clash may arise as the days may be over - lapping. But mere clash is not sufficient. It is true that if the cattle market is held by one or the other party on the days when cattle fair is held a clash may arise as the days may be over - lapping. But mere clash is not sufficient. The Mukhya Adhikari should have found that it shall result in apprehension of breach of peace. No such finding has been recorded nor any material has been pointed out in the order which may indicate that holding of cattle market or cattle fair days would have led to law and order problem. Even assuming that there is a clash which may lead to apprehension of breach of peace as there appears no love last between petitioner and opposite party as is clear from various petitions which have been filed in this Court leaving apart the Civil suits. But equites of parties could have been adjusted by directing that in the days when one of the other party holds the cattle, fair the other party shall not be permitted to hold cattle market For instance, during the two cattle fair for which permission had been granted in favour of opposite party from 19th March 1988 the Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parishad while issuing licence in favour of petitioner could have imposed the condition that in these intervening period the petitioner shall not be entitled to hold his cattle fair on Wednesday and Sunday. Similarly the opposite party could have been restrained from holding his cattle market on Tuesday and Friday during the period the petitioner was permitted to hold cattle fair namely. Asharh Sudi Parwa to Shravan Sadi Parwa. It should have avoided the clash if there was any and would have been just to both the parties. 5. In the result his petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 30th April, 1988 is quashed. The order suspending petitioner's licence had already been rendered ineffective when Civil Mics. Writ No. 722 of 1988 was decided. The petitioner shall be entitled to hold the cattle market and fair in lieu of licence granted earlier. The Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Parishad is further directed to consider the applications of petitioner and opposite party for reneval in the light of observation made above. There shall be no order as to costs.