JUDGEMENT 1. The dispute relates to Khata No. 2546, Plot No. 12636, measuring 1.76 decimals situated in Village-Riga within the district of Sitamarhi. The plot in question is a water body. The petitioner claims that the water body belongs to him and his name is entered in the revenue records to indicate that the petitioner has title over the said lands and pokhar on it. 2. Counsel for the State submits that the pokhar is amalgamated with the Government pokhar and the State has been settling the water body in favour of the private respondents since 1961-62. It is further stated that the water body was transferred to the Fisheries Department and ever since the transfer, the Fisheries Department has been dealing with the said pokhar. This dispute was the subject matter of a consolidation proceeding. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector by order dated 3.11.1987 passed an order in favour of the State of Bihar holding that since the lands had vested in the State of Bihar and the State had transferred the land to the Fisheries Department, the petitioner was not entitled to claim that the land and the water body should be recorded in his name. Against the order dated 3.1.1987, the petitioner filed revision before the Joint Director, Consolidation which is numbered as 3148 of 1987. The order of the appellate court was set aside by order dated 2.1.1988/12.1.1988 with leave to the State of Bihar to file a suit for declaration that the lands and the water body thereon belongs to the State of Bihar, if they so desire. No steps were taken by the State of Bihar in this matter. The present writ application has been filed restraining the respondent-State from settling the water body in favour of the private respondent Jitu Sahani. 3. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Jitu Sahani. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds that the order passed by the Consolidation Court in Revision Case No. 3148 of 1987 has not been challenged by the State of Bihar by filing a writ application or by moving the competent court of civil jurisdiction for a declaration of their rights. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds that the order passed by the Consolidation Court in Revision Case No. 3148 of 1987 has not been challenged by the State of Bihar by filing a writ application or by moving the competent court of civil jurisdiction for a declaration of their rights. The facts remains that the State has settled the lands of Khata No. 2546, Plot No. 12636, measuring area 1.76 decimals in favour of the private respondent giving him the right to fish in the said water body which has created the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no. 9 as well. It would be in the interest of justice that the State should take proper steps to get a declaration from a compe tent court in this matter and also to pray before the Court concerned regarding the settlement of the water body in the interim period when the suit is pending. 5. One of the claims of the State is that the water body is amalgamated with the water body belonging to the State of Bihar. Until otherwise decided by the Court of competent jurisdiction, it would be advisable that the parties should settle the water body jointly to the extent of their share by a bid held by the State of Bihar, as prescribed under the law, through the Fisheries Department. The petitioner would of course be entitled to his share of the settlement amount till appropriate orders are passed by the competent Civil Court. 6. This application is allowed to the extent indicated above.