Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010143892025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6090/2024 HOWLY RAAS MAHOTSAV UDJAPAN SAMITY AND ANR REP. BY ITS SECRETARY MR. AMARENDRA PATHAK AGE-59 YRS S/O- LATE N PATHAK R/O-WARD NO-3 MAIRAMARA P.O AND P.S- HOWLY BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781316 VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE SECRETARYTO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BARPETA MUSLIMPATTY JOTI GAON PIN-781301 DIST- BARPETA ASSAM Linked Case : WP(C)/6401/2024 BAMAKHATA 1 NO. TARUN SANGHA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PRADYUT TALUKDAR VILL.- BAMAKHATA PATHSALA BAJALI PIN- 781325 ASSAM Page No.# 2/7 VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY-781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 ASSAM 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-781006 ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, BARPETA, DIST. BARPETA ASSAM 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BARPETA MUSLIMPATTY JOTI GAON PIN- 781301 DIST. BARPETA ASSAM Linked Case : WP(C)/6402/2024 SRI SRI MOHALAKHMI PUJA SAMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY RATUL DAS VILL.- KEUTKUCHI NO. 347 BARPETA PIN- 781309 ASSAM VERSUS 1.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 GOVT. OF ASSAM GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-06 ASSAM 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 3/7 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BARPETA MUSLIMPATTY JOTI GAON PIN- 781301 DIST. BARPETA ASSAM For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. N. Baruah and Dr. P.P. Medhi, Advocates. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Borah, Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam. – BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 30.07.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. N. Baruah and Dr. P.P. Medhi, learned Advocates for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. H.K. Das, learned Amicus and Mr. R.K. Borah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam. 2. WP(C) No.6090/2024 has been filed by the petitioners (Howly Raas Mahotsav Udjapan Samity & Anr.); WP(C) No.6401/2024 has been filed by the petitioner (Bamankhata 1 No. Tarun Sangha) and WP(C) No.6402/2024 has been filed by the petitioner (Sri Sri Mohalakhmi Puja Samitee) challenging the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Finance Department rejecting the prayer of the writ petitioners for permitting them to conduct lottery for the charitable purpose. 3. The background facts would be necessary to be stated in short. 4. PIL No.29/2024 was filed before this Court seeking stoppage of Page No.# 4/7 illegal organizing of off-line and on-line lottery in various districts of the State of Assam. 5. In that case, the Amicus had pointed out that in accordance with the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 and the Lotteries (Regulation) Rules, 2010, only the State Government could organize lottery, and that too, on certain terms and conditions. However, it was found that many individuals, after seeking permission from the District Commissioners, were organizing off-line and on-line lottery. Many a times, such permissions were granted by the District Officials without verifying the person applying for conducting such lottery. 6. The experience had been that such lottery operators were playing with the gullibility and naivety of poor people and the money so collected from them were being squandered or misused for personal purposes. 7. The PIL, therefore, aimed at seeking a prohibitory order from the Court so that the poor people are not put to any disadvantage because of the dubious ways of such private operators in the field. 8. The Division Bench, hearing the PIL, vide order dated 03.10.2024 directed the State Government, as an interim measure, to issue directions to all the District Commissioners, including the Superintendents of Police of all the Districts of Assam, not to grant any permission to any individual/organisation for organising off-line/on-line lotteries and in case any such off-line or on-line lotteries were found to be organized illegally, the Superintendent of Police had to take immediate action against those persons/organisers in accordance with law. 9. By filing WP(C) No.5449/2024, writ petitioners (Howly Ras Mahotsav Page No.# 5/7 Udjapan Samity and Anr.), however, wanted a modification in such order passed in the PIL which was rightly disallowed. However, a liberty was given to the writ petitioners to approach the State Government for grant of permission to organize lotteries/Lucky Coupon Draw on the eve of Howly Raas Mahatsov. 10. It was clarified by order dated 25.10.2024 passed in WP(C) No.5449/2024 that if any such application seeking permission is moved by the writ petitioners, it was expected that the Government would consider and decide the same expeditiously taking into consideration the provisions of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 and the Lotteries (Regulation) Rules, 2010. 11. Pursuant to the afore-noted leave granted by the Division Bench, the petitioners applied for permission to hold such lottery on the eve of an impending festival but the same was rejected. 12. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the reasons assigned by the Authority for rejecting such application which, in his submission, are totally unfounded and wrong. 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 Page No.# 6/7 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. While granting such leave, the Division Bench Page No.# 7/7 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. 20. The order so passed by the Authority shall be communicated to the writ petitioners forthwith. 21. The writ petitions stand disposed off. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant