Judgment P.K.Deb, J. 1. This writ petition has been preferred for quashing the portion of Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 by which Gorhodhar Jalkar of Maheshi Anchal has been included by the Government under notification as a selected Jalkar for the purpose of free fishing. 2. The admitted position remains that Government formed a Committee for consideration of different Jalkars of different areas to be enquired into as to whether those could be notified as free fishing Jalkars or not. By Annexure-5, the Committee has recommended different Jalkars but Gorhodhar Jalkar had never been included within the Maheshi Anchal for the purpose of free fishing, but then the District Fishery Officer Annexure-7 has recommended that Gorhodhar Jalkar should also be included as a free fishing Jalkar within Maheshi Anchal. That report of the District Fishery Officer was sent to the Government with the recommendation of the Deputy Director Fisheries and, accordingly, on the basis of the recommendation as made by the District Fishery Officer included Gorhodhar Jalkar as free fishing Jalkar but due to inadvertence in Annexure-2 the said Jalkar was included under Kahra Anchal and, ultimately, vide Annexure-1 therefrom was made in Annexure-2 by including Gorhodhar Jalkar within Maheshi Anchal. 3. Contention of the learned Counsel appearing for and behalf of the petitioners is that Annexures-1 & 2 are directly in violation of Annexure-5 as the Committee which was formed by the Government had never found the impugned Jalkar as free fishing Jalkar and, as such, no recommendation was made although in the Maheshi Anchal several other Jalkars were included as free fishing Jalkars. Further contention is that Gorhodhar Jalkar was also considered by the Committee for the purpose of free fishing but it was not found to be fit one and, as such, the same was not included in the report of the recommendation as made vide Annexure-5. Then, by on recommendation of the District Fishery Officer or the Deputy Director of the Fisheries the recommendation of the Committee cannot be given go by to include Gorhodhar Jalkar also as a free fishing zone, which is nothing but a promising estoppel from the side of the Government. In paras 18 & 19 of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged about illegal inclusion of Gorhodhar Jalkar as a free fishing Jalkar has not been traversed or denied in the counter-affidavit filed. In paras 18 & 19 of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged about illegal inclusion of Gorhodhar Jalkar as a free fishing Jalkar has not been traversed or denied in the counter-affidavit filed. Only it was mentioned regarding those paras that those were matters of records. 4. During the course of argument on 2-9-99 a time was taken by the State Counsel to seek instructions in the matter and time was, accordingly, allowed. But today again the State Counsel submits that properly denial has not been made in counter-affidavit and, as such, time should be allowed to seek further instructions and file supplementary counter-affidavit. The case was registered in the year 1996 and stay was also granted vide order dated 21 -3-96 and counter-affidavit was filed long back. Now, there is no scope to grant further time to fill up the lacuna. 5. The factual position remains that although the State Government had formed the Committee for consideration of free fishing Jalkars but the Committee did not recommend about Gorhodhar Jalkar in the Maheshi area to be the free fishing Jalkar and, as such, report was accepted by the Government and then when the recommendation of the Committee was lying with the Government for notification, then a letter was written by the District Fishery Officer and forwarded by the Deputy Director of Fisheries for inclusion of the disputed Jalkar as free fishing one and on that letter Government has included the said Jalkar also as a free fishing Jalkar which definitely in violation of Annexure-5, the recommendation made by the Committee. When the Committee has already been formed then the Government is to take action on the recommendation of the Committee. Supposing the fact that the Committee has left out any Jalkar which has been pointed out by the District Fishery Officer then the said letter of District Fishery Officer must have been sent to the Committee for re-consideration before taking action by the Government, But, without doing so only on the recommendation of the District Fishery Officer the State Government cannot act giving go by to its own policy decision. It may be mentioned here that on similar situation another Jalkar was also included on the recommendation of the District Fishery Office which was not recommended by the Committee formed by the Government and then objection was raised and by Annexure-9 Government had corrected the same having out the said Jalkar from the zone of free fishing. The same position remains with the present Jalkar also. 6. In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is hereby allowed. Annexures 1 & 2 are hereby quashed to the extent of inclusion of Gorhodhar Jalkar within the Maheshi area as a free fishing Jalkar. It is made clear that such allowance of writ petition could not debar the Government to take further action in the matter which is proper, legal and justified.