Disposed

Dibrugarh Fishery Co-Operative Society Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Sept 2019WP(C)/6496/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that boundary disputes between fisheries cannot be settled in a writ petition. The petitioner's prayer for withdrawal was allowed, disposing of the writ petition with liberty to approach the district Administration.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition allowed with liberty to approach the district Administration.

Dibrugarh Fishery Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010205162019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6496/2019

¶5

1:DIBRUGARH FISHERY CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.

¶6

DIBRUGARH, DIST.- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SRI BIKASH DAS, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, SON OF LATE BOPUL DAS, RESIDENT OF NORTH AMOLAPOTTY, DIBRUGARH TOWN, DISTRICT- DIBRUGARH, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FISHERY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶12

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶13

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶14

5:THE MURKONGCHELEK ANCHALIK PANCHYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MURKONGCHELEK ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT JONAI

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶17

6:PRESIDENT MURKONGCHELEK ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT JONAI DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶18

7:BIJAY NARAH S/O- SRI JATIN NARAH MOUZA- JONAI VILLAGE- LAKHAJAN POST OFFICE- CHAMKANG DISTRICT- DHEMAJI ASSAM

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BANIK

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶21

BEFORE

¶22

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 06-09-2019

¶25

Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Nath, learned Standing Counsel, PNRD, Assam, appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 6 and Ms. D.D. Barman, learned Government Advocate, Assam representing respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5.

¶26

The petitioner’s society is constituted by members who are the residents of the neighbourhood of Brahmaputra Part-III fishery in the district of Dibrugarh. The grievance of the petitioners is that their fishing right is being unduly interfered with by unauthorized persons being emboldened by the order of settlement issued by the Murkongchelek Anchalik Panchayat.

¶27

After hearing the petitioner’s counsel, I find that the complaint is regarding the boundary dispute of two fisheries and, therefore, the said aspect of the matter cannot be settled in this writ petition.

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

At this stage, Mr. Banik prays for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to approach the district Administration ventilating the grievance of the petitioner society.

¶30

Prayer allowed.

¶31

This writ petition stands disposed of on withdrawal with liberty as prayed for.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Sukhamay

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Dibrugarh Fishery Co-Operative Society Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dibrugarh Fishery Co-Operative Society Ltd. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Achyut Krishna Das and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 12 Ors.

Sakuntala Kalita Vs the United Bank of India

Kukil Das Vs the State of Assam and 17 Ors.

Sukleswar Bordoloi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S. Saikhowa Sadiya Min Samabai Samiti Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Sanjib Kr. Ray Vs the State of Assam