Pragatishil Atmasahayak Got Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010021462021

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:7142

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4419/2020

¶6

PRAGATISHIL ATMASAHAYAK GOT REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN MRS. HEMLATA DAS W/O. SHRI ARJUN DAS R/O. VILL. SISIMUKH P.O. SISIMUKJH DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-787078.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. FISHERY DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FISHERY DEPTT. DIPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER

¶9

DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶10

4:THE DISTRICT FISHERY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

¶11

DHEMAJI.

¶12

Page No.# 2/5

¶13

5:M/S GOHAINGAON BAHUMUKHI MAHILA SAMABAI SAMITY LTD. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY P.O. AND DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-787057. -----------Advocate for : MR. S BANIK Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶14

Linked Case: WP(C)/903/2021

¶15

PRAGATISHIL ATMASAHAYAK GOT

¶16

REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN MRS. HEMLATA DAS, W/O. SHRI ARJUN DAS, R/O. VILL. SISIMUKH, P.O. SISIKUKJH, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-787078.

¶17

VERSUS

¶18

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶19

REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. FISHERY DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI781006.

¶20

2:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FISHERY DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.

¶21

3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER

¶22

DHEMAJI ASSAM.

¶23

4:THE DISTRICT FISHERY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

¶24

DHEMAJI.

¶25

5:M/S GOHAIGAON BAHUMUKHI MAHILA SAMABAI SAMITY LTD. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY P.O. AND DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-787057

¶26

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BANIK, MS F BEGUM,A N HUSSAIN

¶27

Page No.# 3/5

¶28

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FISHERY DEPARTMENT

¶29

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶30

ORDER

¶31

03.06.2025

¶32

Heard Mr. S Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. P. Sarma, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos.1 & 2, while Mr. Chetia, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos.3 & 4. No one appears for the respondent No.5. However, the Lawazima Court’s order dated 23.05.2025 states that service of notice in respect of the respondent No.5 is complete.

¶33

In WP(C) No.4419/2020, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 11.05.2020 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fishery Department, by which the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji has been requested to allow the lessee, i.e., the respondent No.5 to run the Chengajan Group Fishery, as per existing rate of revenue @Rs.1,53,001/- per annum.

¶34

In WP(C) No.903/2021, the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 issued by the Fishery Department extending the settlement of the Chengajan Group Fishery in favour of the respondent No.5, beyond the validity of the period of the lease settlement, i.e., 26.04.2020, has been put to challenge.

¶35

The challenge in both the cases relate to the extension of the settlement period of the fishery beyond 26.04.2020.

¶36

The counsels for the parties have brought to the notice of the Court the

¶37

Page No.# 4/5

¶38

judgment and order dated 19.05.2022 passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021, wherein it had set aside the extension of the lease of the fishery given to the respondent No.5 vide the impugned order dated 22.01.2021, after the expiry of the validity of the lease period of the fishery on 26.04.2020.

¶39

The judgment and order dated 19.05.2022 passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021, wherein the respondent No.5 was also a party, has clearly stated in Para 16 & 19 as follows:-

¶40

“16. From this point of view, this court un-hesitantly holds that the extension of lease after expiry of lease was beyond the competence and jurisdiction of authority. Accordingly, the same is interfered with.

¶41

Accordingly this writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The respondent State is directed to sale/settle the fishery in question through Tender as per the Assam Fishery Rules, 1953 within a period of four weeks from receipt of a copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioner before the respondent authorities.”

¶42

Mr. P. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 has also submitted a letter eCF No. E-274672/53 dated 02.06.2025 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fishery Department, which is to the effect that the Government is contemplating immediate action for termination of the extension order of the fishery dated 22.01.2021. Further, a separate order was being issued to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji, to take over physical possession of the fishery and take action for regular settlement within a fixed timeline with issuance of NIT.

¶43

Mr. M. Chetia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 has submitted a letter dated 31.05.2025 issued by the District Fishery Development Officer,

¶44

Page No.# 5/5

¶45

Dhemaji to the Addl. District Commissioner (Fishery), Dhemaji, which shows that the respondent No.5 is to run the fishery till 13.07.2025.

¶46

On perusing the judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021, there was no ground for allowing the respondent No.5 to run the fishery beyond the date of judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021, inasmuch as, the impugned order dated 22.01.2021, which had been challenged in WP(C) No.903/2021 had been set aside.

¶47

In that view of the matter, the respondents are directed to immediately take over possession of the Chengajan Group Fishery, Dhemaji from the respondent No.5 and take steps for regular settlement of the same through issuance of an NIT. It is made clear that if the respondents do not take immediate possession of the fishery from the respondent No.5, consequences for noncompliance of this order and the judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021 may follow, against the erring officials and the respondent No.5.

¶48

In view of the judgment and order passed in WP(C) No.1174/2021, any order issued by the respondents, including the letter dated 31.05.2025 issued by the District Fishery Development Officer, Dhemaji, allowing the respondent No.5 to run the fishery, is/are hereby set aside.

¶49

The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.

¶50

JUDGE

¶51

Comparing Assistant

Pragatishil Atmasahayak Got v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pragatishil Atmasahayak Got v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banamali Sarkar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S. Sonu Enterprise Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

M/S. Klirdap Stone Crusher Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Pragatishil Atmasahayak Got Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Management of Hukanpukhuri Tea Estate Vs the State of Assam and 14 Ors.

Mahirul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.