Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 15 October, 2025
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010220672025
2025:GAU-AS:13813
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5863/2025
SARBAJANIN SRI SRI LAKSHMI MANDIR SAMITTEE AND ANR
NITYANANDA, BAJALI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SANTANU
SARMA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O NABA KANTA SARMA, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE- NITYANANDA, DIST- BAJALI, ASSAM- 781329.
2: SANTANU SARMA
S/O NABA KANTA SARMA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NITYANANDA
DIST- BAJALI
ASSAM-781329
AND PRESENTLY THE PRESIDENT
SARBAJANIN SRI SRI LAKSHMI MANDIR SAMITTEE
NITYANANDA
BAJAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-06
ASSAM
3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/5
4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
BAJALI
DISTRICT- BAJALI
ASSAM
5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
BAJALI
DISTRICT- BAJALI
ASSA
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Advocates for the petitioner(s) :Mr. S Hoque
Advocates for the respondent(s) : Mr. B Gogoi, Addl. AG, Assam
Date of hearing & judgment :15.10.2025
JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL)
Heard Mr. S Hoque, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners. Mr. B Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General,
Assam appears on behalf of all the respondents.
2. The petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated
13.11.2024 passed by the respondent No.3 declining the petitioner's
request to be permitted to hold its annually organized lottery during
Page No.# 3/5
the occasions of Raas Mahotsav, Lakshmi Puja etc., and further
seeking directions that the respondent No.3 to reconsider the prayer
of the petitioner for conducting annual lottery to be held at Sri Sri
Lakshmi Mandir Samittee, Nityananda, Bajali.
3. This Court had duly taken note of the fact that the order dated
13.11.2024 passed by the Secretary to the Government of Assam,
Finance Department, had already been interfered with by the learned
Division Bench vide the judgment and order dated 30.07.2025 in
WP(C)No.6090/2024, WP(C)No.6401/2024 and WP(C)No.6402/2024.
4. This Court further takes note of that the learned Division Bench
while dealing with the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by the
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance Department had also
opined in clear and unambiguous terms that the order dated
13.11.2024 suffers from malice in law, taking into account that the
same had been decided on a non-existent ground i.e. restraining
order passed in the PIL No.29/2024 by completely disregarding
/overlooking the leave granted by the Division Bench in another
petition. It is, therefore, the opinion of this Court that as the order
dated 13.11.2024 passed by the Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Finance Department has already been interfered with,
appropriate directions can be passed on the basis of the Judgment
Page No.# 4/5
and Order dated 30.07.2025 referred to hereinabove.
5. This Court for the purpose of the instant writ petition finds it
pertinent to quote paragraph Nos. 13 to 19 of the said Judgment and
Order dated 30.07.2025 passed in WP(C)No.6090/2024 along with
two other writ petitions which would enable this Court to pass
appropriate directions also in the present writ petition. The said
paragraphs are quoted hereinbelow:
"13. Five grounds weighed with the concerned authority in rejecting the prayer of the
petitioners. First was that the State Government did not have any authority under the
Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 and Lotteries (Regulation) Rules, 2010 to allow any
applicant to conduct gift coupon draw/lottery by their own as prayed for.
14. This, in our estimation, is a specious plea for not applying mind before deciding
an issue. The Act of 1998 and the Rules of 2010 are relatable to State organized
lotteries which are covered by List I, Entry 40 of Schedule VII of the Constitution.
Betting and gambling is but a State subject by virtue of Entry 34, List II of Schedule VII.
15. The second ground too is not sustainable, namely, that the State of Assam is a
lottery free zone upon withdrawal of the Assam State Lottery Rules, 1994. This also
would have no application to the facts presented by the writ petitioners.
16. The main reason why the prayer of the writ petitioners was disallowed was that
an interim order had been passed by the Division Bench in PIL No.29/2024 restraining
any Government authorities from giving permission to any private party to conduct
online and off-line lottery and any such permission to the writ petitioners would have
been in teeth of the restraining order passed by the Division Bench.
17. The learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners has rightly commented that the
Finance Secretary perhaps did not address himself to the fact that in the writ petition
preferred by the petitioners (Howly Raas Mahotsav Udjapan Samity), leave was granted
to them to approach the State authorities and the Division Bench of this Court had
expressed hope and trust that such a prayer would be considered but only keeping in
mind the identity of the party seeking such privilege, the purpose, as also the law in
that regard.
18. The order dated 13.11.2024 impugned in the present writ petitions, therefore,
is absolutely incorrect for the reason of the decision having been based primarily on
non-existent ground, viz. of the restraining order passed in the PIL, completely
forgetting/overlooking the leave granted by the Division Bench in another writ petition.
Page No.# 5/5
While granting such leave, the Division Bench was conscious of the restraining order
passed in the PIL petition.
19. Under the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated
13.11.2024 passed by the Finance Secretary and remit the matters before him again to
look into all aspects of the matters and pass a fresh order within a period of 3(three)
weeks, to be counted from the date of production of a copy of this order before the
Authority."
6. In view of the above directions passed by the learned Division
Bench of this Court vide the Judgment and Order dated 30.07.2025, it
is the opinion of this Court that the petitioner is also entitled to the
similar relief.
7. Accordingly, this Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ
petition thereby setting aside the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by
the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance Department,
insofar as the same relates to the petitioner in the present case and
directs the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance
Department to again look into all aspects of the matter and pass a
fresh order within a period of 3(three) weeks, to be counted from the
date of service of a certified copy of this order before the Secretary to
the Government of Assam, Finance Department.
8. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
