Judgment 1. Admittedly the petitioner is a registered Co-operative Society of Harizan Naw Avam Jahaj Tatha Sadak Yatayat Swavalambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Munger and it has been settled with the Raj Ghat Ferry Services Munger for the period from 2000 to 2002 but while carrying out the ferry services the petitioner had to face various difficulties as some unsocial elements at the instance of Lalan Yadav was creating disturbance in the ferry service. The petitioner had made representation before the local authorities including the Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate. At some point of time it appears that there was an order for giving protection to the petitioner by giving it police guard for carrying on the ferry service as per settlement. A criminal case was also lodged but then by order dated 3.4.2002 as contained in Annexure-28 the District Magistrate, Munger has stopped the ferry services until further orders. Such order has been passed on 3rd of April, 2002. The grievance of the petitioner is in respect of this Annexure-28. The ground for stoppage has been shown as some problem had arisen of law and order regarding the management of the ferry services and that there was some jurisdictional dispute regarding the Ghats and, as such, such stoppage order has been passed. In the counter affidavit filed the order passed at Annexure-28 has been attempted to be justified on the ground that as law and order problems have been created and also there was some dispute regarding jurisdiction the ferry services had to be stopped. On the face of it such stoppage order is to the detriment of all interest of the petitioner. The money involved is also of paramount importance. The petitioners loss can be imagined on the face of it. It should also be mentioned here that when settlement has been made in favour of the petitioner by the government instrumentality and when Constitution has given a protection to the Citizens for pursuing their profession and business without any hindrance then definitely it becomes the bounden duty of the law and order authority to give protection to the petitioner so that he can pursue his profession uninterruptedly and peacefully. That law and order problem was there i.e. an admitted fact because complaints were there from the side of the petitioner rather the petitioner contended that the unsocial elements in collusion with local administrator were creating disturbance to the ferry service. The jurisdictional matter as has been raised appears to be of a plea for Pleas sake because the District Magistrate, of neighbouring districts had already settled the matter which can be well found as contained in Annexure-22. In the counter affidavit at one hand it is stated that on the grievance of the petitioner S.P. had been directed to give protection to the petitioner. On the other hand on the same plea of law and order the ferry service has been stopped. Authority cannot blow hot and cold at the same time. In that way the order passed by the authority stopping the ferry service as contained in Annexure-28 is hereby quashed with a direction to the District Magistrate, Munger to give protection to the petitioner so that he can pursue his duties for fulfilment of the settlement regarding ferry services for the period for which he had been settled so. 2. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.