Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010224292025 2025:GAU-AS:16038 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6390/2025 M/S ANKURAN JOINT LIABILITY SWABALAMBI SHG AND ANR WITH REGISTRATION NUMBER EC/SIRD/JOY-39/2012-2013/42 A SELF HELP GROUP ALSO REGISTERED UNDER THE ASSAM CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2007 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE IN DESANGMUKH, JAIL GAON, P.O. DESANGMUKH, SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, 785663 2: JITU HAZARIKA REPRESENTATIVE OF PETITIONER NO.1 AND SECRETARY OF M/S ANKURAN JOINT LIABILITY SWABALAMBI SHG S/O- KAMAL CHANDRA HAZARIKA RESIDENT OF JAIL GAON P.O. DESANGMUKH P.S. SIVASAGAR SIVASAGAR ASSAM 78566 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 10 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, FISHERY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, 781006 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640 3:THE JOINT SECRETARY FISHERY DEPARTMENT GOVT OF ASSAM GUWAHATI Page No.# 2/7 781006 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER SIVASAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640 5:THE DISTRICT FISHERY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640 6:THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETY SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640 7:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SIVASAGAR DEVELOPMENT BLOCK KHELUA 785701 8:M/S NATUN GETENGA DRUBHOJYOTI SELF HELP GROUP NATUN GETENGA SHANTIPUR SIVASAGAR 785667 9:ROWMARIA PHUKAN FADIYA DIPJYOYTI SELF HELP GROUP NATUN GETENGA SHANTIPUR SIVASAGAR 785667 10:THE NOTUN GETENGA RAJIV HAZARIKA SELF HELP GROUP NATUN GETENGA SHANTIPUR SIVASAGAR 785667 11:SABAN SELF HELP GROUP NATUN GETENGA SHANTIPUR SIVASAGAR 78566 Page No.# 3/7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocate for the petitioner (s) : Mr. J. Kalita, Advocate Advocate for the Respondent(s) : Ms. S. Chutia, SC, Fishery Mr. K. Gogoi, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate Ms. M. D. Borah, Advocate Mr. K. Mohammed, Advocate Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 21.11.2025 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : NA Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : Yes JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. J. Kalita, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Ms. S. Chutia the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5; Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.2, 4 & 7; Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent No.6 and Mr. K. Mohammad, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent No.8. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners Page No.# 4/7 challenging the work order dated 18.08.2025 issued by the Joint Secretary, Fishery Department, Government of Assam in favour of the Respondent No.8 and further seeking direction upon the Respondent Authorities to issue a fresh work order in favour of the petitioners in connection with the settlement of the Brahmaputra Part-I Meen Mahal, Sivasagar. 3. The materials on record reveal that pursuant to a tender notice issued for settlement of the Brahmaputra Part-I Fishery dated 13.05.2025 on annual lease, various bidders participated in the said tender proceedings. Upon evaluation made by the Tender Committee, it was found that out of the seven bidders, three bidders were invalid due to non-submission of documents and their bids were not considered. One bidder withdrew his bid. Amongst the other three bidders which included the petitioners and the Respondent Nos.8 & 10 remained in the fray. The Respondent No.8 was found to have submitted the highest valid bid and taking into account that the Respondent No.8 had submitted all relevant documents in terms with the NIT and also the report of the Revenue Circle Officer, Sivasagar, it was decided that the Respondent No.8 should be settled the fishery in question for a period of seven years from the date of handing over of the possession of the fishery after completion of all required formalities. This order dated 18.08.2025 has been put Page No.# 5/7 to challenge before this Court by filing the instant proceedings. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the Respondent No.8 did not have a valid 100% fisherman certificate as well as the neighborhood certificate, and as such, the settlement so made in favour of the Respondent No.8 was illegal, and accordingly, sought for quashing of the order dated 18.08.2025. 5. When the writ petition was moved, this Court permitted the petitioners to bring on record by way of an additional affidavit certain information which the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been able to get under the Right to Information Act, 2005. From the additional affidavit which has been filed, it appears that the petitioners have filed a complaint before the Circle Officer, Sivasagar Revenue Circle and in that regard, the Circle Officer vide the communication issued on 21.08.2025 to the Additional District Commissioner, Sivasagar submitted that both the Respondent Nos.8 & 10 had submitted valid 100% fisherman certificate as well as riverside certificate. 6. The petitioners being aggrieved thereupon submitted a complaint to the District Commissioner, Sivasagar on 27.08.2025 to conduct an impartial investigation into the matter as well as cancel the settlement made in favour of the Respondent No.8. Further to that, the petitioners have also alleged that the Page No.# 6/7 certificate which was issued to the Respondent No.8 was given without carrying out actual verification and for extraneous consideration and as such also sought for appropriate legal and departmental actions against the officials and the groups involved. 7. This Court further takes note of that pursuant to the said complaint being filed on 27.08.2025 by the petitioners, the District Magistrate, Sivasagar had endorsed the file to the Executive Magistrate, Sivasagar for making necessary enquiries and the said Executive Magistrate, Sivasagar had issued notice/summons to all concerned to make enquiry as to whether there were any irregularities in the seven year lease settlement of the Brahmaputra Part-I Fishery. It is also noticed that the next was fixed on 20.11.2025. 8. It is the opinion of this Court that unless and until there is any official document showing that the certificate which had been issued in favour of the Respondent No.8 is without proper verification or such certificates are cancelled, this Court cannot enter into the arena of facts as to whether all the members of the Respondent No.8 are 100% fisherman or as well as whether the Respondent No.8 Fisherman Cooperative Society is within the distance as stated in the certificate so issued by the Circle Officer, Sivasagar. Page No.# 7/7 9. This aspect is however being looked into by the Executive Magistrate, Sivasagar, and as such, it is therefore the opinion of this Court that as the said Authority is looking into the said aspect, it would not be proper on the part of this Court at this stage to proceed with the instant writ petition. 10. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) The Executive Magistrate, Sivasagar who is presently enquiring in respect to the complaint petition filed by the petitioners dated 27.08.2025 is directed to complete the said enquiry proceedings preferably within three months. (ii) Depending on the outcome of the said enquiry proceedings, the petitioners if so aggrieved would be at liberty to approach the appropriate authority including this Court. 11. During the course of hearing, Mr. K. Mohammad, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.8 has placed before this Court two certificates which are kept on record and marked with the letters “X” and “Y” respectively. JUDGE Comparing Assistant Pradip Kumar Kalita Digitally signed by Pradip Kumar Kalita Date: 2025.11.29 15:12:45 +05'30'