Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010160762025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4107/2025 SMTI SAMITI DAS W/O- SRI PHANIDHAR DAS, R/O- VILL.- BAMGAON, P.O. GOHAINGAON, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FISHERY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI ASSAM 3:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (FISHERY) DHEMAJI ASSAM 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER JONAI REVENUE CIRCLE JONAI DHEMAJI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A ALI, MS. M KHATUN,MS K TAYE Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 15.12.2025 Heard Mr.T.K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. U. Das, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4. None appears for the respondent No. 1 despite notice. 2. Challenge made in this writ petition is to the Communication/Demand Notice dated 17.06.2025 issued by the Additional District Commissioner (Fishery), Dhemaji, whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit the outstanding dues of ₹5,90,004/- within a period of 1 (one) week from the date of receipt of the Demand Notice. 3. The petitioner is the Secretary of M/S Gohaigaon Bahamukhi S.S. Ltd. and a business woman, who used to participate in the tender for settlement of various fisheries of Dhemaji District, Assam. 4. The Chengajan Group Fishery, No. 50 Bagalmara River Fishery and No. 22 Bangalmara Pabhamari Fishery of Dhemaji District were settled with the petitioner by orders dated 28.04.2013, 30.07.2020 and 16.01.2021. 5. It is the contention of the petitioner that due to various reasons, she could not properly operate the fisheries, consequent to which, she could not collect the revenue after the settlement of the fisheries was accepted. Therefore, the petitioner could not pay the revenue for the aforesaid fisheries. 6. Mr. T.K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to her inability to collect the revenue from the aforesaid fisheries settled with the petitioner, she could not deposit the required revenue to the respondent Page No.# 3/4 authorities. While not disputing the outstanding dues, he submits that the petitioner may be granted some time to pay the outstanding amount as the petitioner is an old lady, aged about 62 years, having various ailments. 7. Ms. U. Das, learned State Counsel submits that there is no dispute to the liability of the petitioner to pay the revenue on account of settlement of the fisheries. A Demand Notice on 27.01.2025 was initially issued by the Additional District Commissioner (Fishery), Dhemaji for a total outstanding amount of ₹4,37,003/-. Thereafter, on her being default, a final notice was issued on 17.06.2025 for a total amount of ₹5,90,004/-. Therefore, the petitioner is liable to deposit the government revenue forthwith with the applicable rate of interest as the aforesaid fisheries were settled and accepted by the petitioner. 8. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 9. There is no dispute to the liability of the petitioner to pay the revenue to the Government for settlement of Chengajan Group Fishery, No. 50 Bagalmara River Fishery and No. 22 Bangalmara Pabhamari Fishery of Dhemaji District, which now comes to a total outstanding of ₹5,90,004/-. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not disputing the liability to pay the said amount but only prayed for granting some time to deposit the said amount of ₹5,90,004/- on the ground that the petitioner is an old lady having various ailments and the revenue could not be paid in time due to her inability to properly operate the fisheries and collect revenue. 11. Having considered that the outstanding amount of ₹5,90,004/- having been due on the petitioner to be paid by her to the Government as revenue for settlement of fisheries, which is not disputed, I am of the considered view that Page No.# 4/4 the present writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to deposit the outstanding revenue of ₹5,90,004/- within a specified time. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit ₹5,90,004/- within 4 (four) months from today with ₹10,000/- as lump sum interest. 12. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant