Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010130572025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3346/2025 RANGAGORAH FCS LTD A REGISTERED FISHERY COOPERATIVE SOCIETY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT GUIJAN, P.O- RANGAGORAH, DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM. REP. BY ITS SERETARY , PRASANNA DAS , AGED 65 YRS, S/O- LATE PARSURAM DAS, R/O-GUIJAN, P.O- RANGAGORAH, P.S AND DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, FISHERY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER TINSUKIA ASSAM 3:THE ADDL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (FISHERY/FOREST) TINSUKIA ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT FISHERY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER TINSUKIA 5:THE CSO AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA MOHANBARI AIRPORT DIBRUGARH Page No.# 2/4 6:THE ASSISTANT MANAGER INDIGO CARGO OPERATIONS MOHANBARI AIRPORT DIBRUGARH 7:CHANNA FISH BUSINESS COMMITTEE A SOCIETY REGD. UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT 1860 P.O- GELAPUKHURI P.S- TINSUKIA DIST- TINSUKIA PIN-786126 REP BY ITS SECRETAR Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BANIK, MS F BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, A A I,SC, FISHERY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 20.06.2025 Heard Shri S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri P. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, Fishery Department as well as Shri S.S. Roy, learned State Counsel. The prayer made in this writ petition reads as follows:- “In the premises aforesaid it is humbly prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased to admit the petition, issue Rule, call for records, issue notice calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Mandamus be not issued directing the respondent authorities to cancel, recall or otherwise forbear from giving effect to the- a. Decision so reached in the Meeting held on 16.05.2025 in the Office Chambers of the District Commissioner Tinsukia, the Minutes of which was drawn on 03.06.2025 (ANNEXURE-B); Page No.# 3/4 and/or why a writ in the nature of Certiorari be not issued setting aside and quashing a. Decision so reached in the Meeting held on 16.05.2025 in the Office Chambers of the District Commissioner Tinsukia, the Minutes of which was drawn on 03.06.2025 ( ANNEXURE-B); and upon cause or causes shown and after hearing the parties, be pleased to allow the writ petition and/or pass such Order/Orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper. -AND- During the pendency of the writ petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to - a. stay the operation of the Minutes dated 03.06.2025 of the Meeting dated (ANNEXURE-B); and b. direct the respondent authorities not to insist upon any certification of any private registered society including the respondent no.7 CHANNA FISH BUSINESS COMMITTEE bearing Registration No. 302 / 147077 /ARCPD1775E/5/2025 registered on 30.05.2025 so registered consequent upon the Meeting dated 16.05.2025 for transportation of fish by airways; and/or pass such order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper. And the petitioner, for such act of kindness, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.” It is the case of the petitioner which is a Fishery Cooperative Society that the District Commissioner, Tinsukia had held a meeting on 16.05.2025 wherein a decision has been taken that a registered certifying society would be formed by some fish traders for certifying the consignment of fish for transport. It is the contention of the petitioner that there is no provision in law for constituting such a committee. Page No.# 4/4 A bare perusal of the Minutes of Meeting held on 16.05.2025 would however show that the decision was taken on an entirely separate context wherein ornamental fish including “Seng Mas” of genus channa was seen to be illegally transported through the Mohanbari Airport, Dibrugarh. The objective of the meeting being in sync with the laws holding the field, this Court is of the opinion that the present petitioner would not have locus to maintain the present challenge by way of a writ petition. There is nothing placed on record that the petitioner is transporting fish by air transport and further, by the impugned action, no right of the petitioner appears to be affected. Writ petition accordingly stands dismissed. The issue is however kept open to be decided in an appropriate case, if so instituted. JUDGE Comparing Assistant