Page No.# 1/4 vs The Assam Fisheries Development ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1262 Gua

                                                                Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010068762022




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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/2532/2022

         RANGLAL MANDAL AND ANR
         S/O- LATE MADAN MONDAL, R/O- VILLAGE PAVAKATI, P.O- BHURGAON,
         P.S- MAYONG, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782411

         2: M/S 129 HARIA DABLONG MIN SAMABAI SAMITI LTD.
          REP. BY ITS SECRETARY KUSHAL DAS
          S/O- LATE BOLO RAM DAS

         AGE ABOUT 43YRS

         R/O- VILLAGE AMKATA

         P.O- JAGI BHAKATGAON

         P.S- JAGIROAD
          MORIGAON DISTRICT
          PIN-78241

         VERSUS

         THE ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND 3
         ORS
         REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIMALA PRASAD CHALIHA ROAD,
         VIP ROAD, CHACHAL GUWAHATI-36, KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

         2:THE CHAIRMAN
         ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. BIMALA PRASAD
         CHALIHA ROAD
         VIP ROAD
          CHACHAL GUWAHATI-36
          KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

         3:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
         ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. BIMALA PRASAD
                                                                          Page No.# 2/4

            CHALIHA ROAD
            VIP ROAD
            CHACHAL GUWAHATI-36
            KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

            4:THE PROJECT MANAGER
             MIDDLE ASSAM REGION
            ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
             CHARAN BEEL
             DISTRICT- MORIGAON
             PIN-78241

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR D J MEDHI

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AFDC




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                         ORDER

Date : 07.04.2022

Heard Ms. U. Baruah, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Khound, the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Mr. P. Sharma, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4.

Issue notice returnable by four weeks.

As the Respondents are duly represented by the learned Standing Counsel, no formal notice needs to be issued to the Respondents.

Extra copies of the petition be furnished upon the learned Standing Counsel within three days.

The case of the Petitioner is that pursuant to a judgment and order dated 08.08.2019 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5620/2019, a Notice Inviting Tender was issued on 23.10.2019. The Petitioner participated in the said Notice Inviting Tender and was selected as the first bidder since all the required certificates have been submitted. Subsequent thereto, on 14.11.2019 after perusal of the comparative statements the Page No.# 3/4

Managing Director vide a Communication dated 17.12.2019 accorded the administrative approval to the settlement to be made in favour of the Petitioner. In pursuance to the said approval an agreement was entered into on 17.12.2019 between the Petitioner and the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation whereby the fishery was settled initially for a period of 4 years but upon satisfactory completion it may be extended to 7 years. The case of the Petitioner is that the Managing Director of Assam Fisheries Development Corporation had issued an order on 15.12.2021 stating inter alia that all Beels which were settled in any mode without inviting tender shall stand cancelled subject to any status-quo order of this Court and the Project Managers of those Districts where these Beels falls are directed to take possession of those Beels. The Petitioner apprehends that on the basis of the said order the settlement made in favour of the Petitioners may be cancelled for which the Petitioner have approached this Court.

The learned Standing Counsel for the AFDC has submitted that the instant writ petition is premature as no steps to that regard have been taken as of now. He however submits that a perusal of the order impugned shows that the said order would be applicable in respect to all settlements made without inviting tender and as it is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner was settled by way of a tender, the same would be regulated in terms with the terms and conditions of the agreement. He however submits that as to whether the Petitioner were actually settled with the tender or not and the veracity of the documents to which the Petitioner have filed in support of its case needs to be examine with the records.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Taking into consideration that prima facie it appears that the Petitioner was settled with the Pakaria Beel, Morigaon by way of a tender process, it is directed that no coercive measures shall be taken against the Petitioner till the next date.

On or before the next date, the Respondents shall file their affidavit in the Page No.# 4/4

instant matter.

An attempt shall be made to dispose off the writ petition at the admission stage.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant