Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010220622025 2025:GAU-AS:13519 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5805/2025 KAUSHIK RANJAN DAS S/O - KRIPESH RANJAN DAS, R/O- VILLAGE - GHILAGURI PART- III, P.O. - GHILAGURI, P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DIST. - BONGAIGAON (ASSAM), PIN- 783383 VERSUS THE ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HAVING OFFICE AT CHACHAL, VIP ROAD, GUWAHATI-781036, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. CHACHAL VIP ROAD GUWAHATI- 781036 KAMRUP M ASSAM. 3:THE PROJECT MANAGER ASSAM FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. LOWER ASSAM REGION ABHAYAPURI BONGAIGAON 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON DIST- BONGAIGAON-783380 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BONGAIGAON Page No.# 2/3 DIST- BONGAIGAON-78338 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. P. Borah, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. U. Das, Addl. Sr. GA : Mr. P. Sarma, AFDC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 26.09.2025 Heard Mr. D. P. Borah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. P. Sarma, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation. I have also heard Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the District Commissioner, Bongaigaon as well as for Superintendent of Police, Bongaigaon. 2. The Petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order dated 09.09.2025 and the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the said order has been passed without considering the representations which have been submitted by the Petitioner before the concerned Respondent Authorities from time to time. 3. This Court enquired with the learned counsel for the Petitioner as to whether pursuant to the order dated 09.09.2025, the Petitioner had submitted any representation. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is not adverse to submit a representation detailing out of the facts so that no further steps is being taken for the Page No.# 3/3 purpose of initiating Bakijai proceedings. 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that taking into account that there has been lot of encroachment in the fishery in question, the Petitioner would not however seek any restoration of the cancellation order. 5. Taking into account the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal. 6. However, liberty is given to the Petitioner to submit representation before the Managing Director of the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation. 7. This Court further observes that if the Petitioner is aggrieved by the non-consideration of the representation or the representation decided against the Petitioner, liberty is given to approach this Court. JUDGE Comparing Assistant