Writ petition concerning settlement of a fishery for 2014-2015 to 2020-2021 was dismissed for non-prosecution after the petitioner's counsel failed to appear on two consecutive dates; the court accepted the respondent's submission that the fishery had been settled with another person via tender, rendering the petition infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010311982019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/9443/2019
PREMDHAN DAS S/O- LT. DHIRENDRA DAS, R/O- SHIVPUR, P.O. JUGIJAN, DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FISHERY DEPTT., GHY-6, DIST- KAMRUP, ASSAM
2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. VIP ROAD CHACHAL GHY- 36 DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER HOJAI P.O. AND DIST.- HOJAI 4:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER HOJAI P.O. AND DIST.- HOJAI 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER HOJAI P.O. AND DIST.- HOJA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Linked Case : WP(C)/5903/2018
SRI PREMDHAN DAS S/O- LT DHIRENDRA DAS R/O- SHIVPUR P.O. JUGIJAN DIST- HOJAI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FISHERY DEPTT. GHY-6 DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. VIP ROAD CHACHAL GHY-36 DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER HOJAI PO AND DIST- HOJAI 4:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER HOJAI PO AND DIST- HOJAI 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER HOJAI PO AND DIST- HOJAI -----------Advocate for : MR. P J SAIKIA Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.
Page No.# 3/3
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
11.03.2024
No one appears for the petitioner on call.
It is also noticed that no one had appeared for the petitioner on the last date.
Mr. P. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, AFDC submits that the settlement of the fishery for which this writ petition has been filed is for the period from 2014-2015 to 2020-2021, i.e. for 7 years. He submits that the fishery has been settled with another person through a tender process and as such, the writ petition has become infructuous.
On considering the fact that no one appeared for the petitioner on two consecutive dates, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging settlement of a fishery should proceed when the petitioner failed to appear and the fishery period had expired.
PREMDHAN DAS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FISHERY DEPTT.
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
THE DY. COMMISSIONER HOJAI
THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER HOJAI
THE CIRCLE OFFICER HOJAI
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
