GUWAHATI, India, Oct. 7 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Sept. 8:
1. Heard Mr. N.C. Das, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. M. Devi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. P. Sarma, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Limited and Mr. N. Borah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 5.
2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the settlement made in favour of the respondent No. 5 of the Balahi Champara Group Fishery of Lakhimpur District. The sole grievance of the petitioner is that the Balahi Champara Group Fishery of Lakhimpur District was earlier a 60% categorized Government Fishery and the Government of Assam originally settled the said Fishery by following the mandate of the proviso to Rule 13 of the Assam Fishery Rules, 1953 (for short, "the Rules of 1953") in favour of the Registered Fishery Cooperative Society formed with 100% actual fishermen belonging to the Schedule Caste Community. It is the further case of the petitioner that the said Balahi Champara Group Fishery of Lakhimpur District was transferred to the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as, "the AFDC") and it has been empowered with the power to make settlement. The case of the petitioner, therefore, is that while settling the said Balahi Champara Group Fishery of Lakhimpur District, the AFDC should also follow the mandate in terms with the proviso to Rule 13 of the Rules of 1953.
3. This Court however finds it pertinent to observe that the issue in that regard has already been settled by the learned Full Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. 129 Haria Dablong Min Mahal Samabat Samity Ltd. Vs. Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. & Others reported in (2001) SCC OnLine Gau 17. In the said judgment, the learned Full Bench of this Court observed that the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation has the sole authority and jurisdiction to lease out/settle the fisheries which have been transferred or vested with them under Rule 8(c)(ii) of the Rules of 1953. Further to that, it was also observed that the Managing Director of the AFDC shall have the authority to make settlement and for that purpose definite guidelines may be laid down so that there is transparency in the matter of settlement. The learned Full Bench of this Court apart from the above also observed that Rule 13 of the Rules of 1953 shall not be applicable insofar as the settlement made by the AFDC. However, it was observed that there is a requirement of laying down the guidelines.
4. Taking into account the said judgment of the learned Full Bench of this Court in the case of M/s. 129 Haria Dablong Min Mahal Samabat Samity Ltd. (supra), it is therefore the opinion of this Court that the basis, on which, the instant writ petition had been filed have no legs to stand.
5. This Court further finds it pertinent to take note of the Notice Inviting Tender bearing No. 5/2022 whereby Bids were invited from interested tenderers belonging to SC Community, Fishermen Community or Registered Fishery Cooperative Societies or belonging to Maimal Community of Barak Valley or 100% actual fishermen by profession for making settlements. The petitioner herein did not challenge the said Notice Inviting Tender, rather, the petitioner had participated in the said tender and having not been successful, has approached this Court.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=zDLovBVSUw02H8XukOjXfHpe3qLfR7CLqm9fjK8oprwogyaDRn2dBavo88N2Byhy&caseno=WP(C)/5707/2022&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010173612022&state_code=6&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
