Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010011572016 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1817/2016 DANDI DHAR DEURI S/O LT. GUNADHAR DEURI, R/O BORMURA MIRI POTHAR, P.O. SAIKHUWA GHAT, DIST- TINSUKIA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, TRANSPORT DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR I.W.T. ASSAM GHY-7 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER I.W.T. DIBRUGARH DIVISION DIBRUGARH-01 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B CHAKRABORTY, MS.P HAZARIKA,MR.T R SARMA,MS.P MITRA Advocate for the Respondent : ADDL. AG, ASSAM, MR.Y DOLOI(R- 1-3),SC, IWT,SC, TRANSPORT,MS.B BHUYAN,MS.K DUTTA Linked Case : WP(C)/1816/2016 Page No.# 2/7 MD. RAMIJUDDIN AHMED S/O. TAZUDDIN AHMED R/O. LOHAPATTY P.O. and P.S. DIBRUGARH DIST. DIBRUGARH ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM TRANSPORT DEPTT. DISPUR GHY.-781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR INLAND WATER TRANSPORT ASSAM GHY.-781007. 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIBRUGARH DIVN. DIBRUGARH-786001 ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MS.P MITRA Advocate for : SC IWT appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 18.02.2025 Heard Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department. Page No.# 3/7 2. Pursuant to the Order dated 30.01.2025, wherein this Court upon the submission made by Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would be satistified if the interim order dated 18.03.2016 passed by this Court is made absolute and the petitioner is willing to forego the other prayers made in the writ petition, the Standing Counsel, Transport Department was directed to obtain instructions in this regard. 3. Today, when the matter was called, Ms. M.D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department has produced a copy of the letter dated 17.02.2025 received from the Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam, Transport Department, wherein a report submitted by Director of Inland Water Transport, Assam dated 14.02.2025 is enclosed, which is said to be agreed upon by the Government in the Transport Department. 4. Pertinent to extract the aforesaid report dated 14.02.2025, which is extracted hereunder for ready reference:- “eCF No. 380492/226 From : Sushmita Kakati, ACS, Director, Inland Water Transport, Assam, Guwahati-07. To : The Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Transport Department, Dispur, Guwahati-6. Sub : WP(C)/1817/2016 (Dandidhar Deuri vs. The State of Assam & Ors) WP(C)1816/2016 (MD. Ramijuddin Ahmed vs State of Assam & Ors). Page No.# 4/7 Ref : Standing Counsel's letter No.MDB/TRANSP SC/ 2025/640 dated 31/01/2025 Sir, With reference to the subject and letter cited above, I have the honour to enclose herewith a copy of letter No.MDB/TRANSP SC/ 2025/640 dated 31/01/2025 received from the Standing Counsel, Transport department, along with the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court judgement order dated 30/01/2025 in the above mentioned cases. Interim orders were issued on 18.03.2016 in both cases, allowing the petitioners to deposit 50% of the kist amount and prevented coercive measures for payment of the lesser amount. Subsequently, a report on the deposited Kist money by the lessees of Sadia Saikhowa ferry service (Dandidhar Deuri) and Dibru Kachari Oriumghat ferry service (Md. Ramijuddin Ahmed) for the period 2015-16 and 2016-17 is collected from the Executive Engineer, IWT Division Jorhat vide letter No. ESF-33/2024- 25/5052 dated 14/02/2025. From the report, it is seen that after the interim judgement order dated 18.03.2016, I. The lessee of Sadia Saikhowa ferry service (Dandidhar Deuri) had deposited 50% of kist money in 4(four) instalments for the period 2016-17. However, he deposited 4(four) full instalments of kist money for the first year i.e. 2015-16 before the interim judgement order. But, the Executive Engineer, IWT Division Jorhat had not released the cash security amounting to 12, 50,000.00 till date. II. Again, the lessee of Dibru Kachari Oriumghat ferry service (Md. Ramijuddin Ahmed) had deposited 50% of kist money in 4(four) instalments for the period 2016-17. However, he deposited 4(four) full instalments of kist money for the first year i.e. 2015-16 (w.e.f 16/05/2015 to 31/03/2016) before the interim judgement order on 18/03/2016. But, the Executive Engineer, IWT Division Jorhat had not released the cash security amounting to 90,000.00 till date. Page No.# 5/7 On 30.01.2025, the counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner would be satisfied if the interim order of 18.03.2016 was made absolute and they are willing to forgo other prayers, and requested that the security money be released to the petitioner. It is pertinent to note that both ferry services have ceased to exist following the commencement of operations on the Sadia Saikhowa Bridge. In view of the above, the interim order dated 18/03/2016 passed by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the above mentioned cases may be considered as absolute. While no additional benefits shall be extended to the petitioners, the security deposit may be released to them subsequently upon the final disposal of the cases. This is for your information and needful action. Yours faithfully, Signed by Sushmita Kakati Director, IWT, Assam Date 14.02.2025 Ulubari, Guwahati-7. Memo eCF No. 380492/226-A Copy to: M.D. Borah, Advocate, Gauhati High Court and Standing Counsel, Transport department for information and necessary action. M.DI. e-signed Director, IWT, Assam, Ulubari, Guwahati-7.” Page No.# 6/7 5. A copy of the aforesaid correspondence has also been furnished to Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Reading of the aforesaid instruction, it appears that the Department is accepting the proposal of the petitioner and is also agreeable for making the interim order absolute. 7. Pertinent also to refer to the interim order passed earlier by this Court on 18.03.2016, which is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:- “The petitioner is the current lessee of the Sadiya Saikhuwa Ferry Service which was settled with him on 11.3.2015 (Annexure-4) for the period 1.4.2015 - 31.3.2017 at an annual bid of Rs.4,10,000/-. The rate of tolls to be collected from the IWT ferries was revised after 11 years, through the notification dated 2.7.2014 (Annexure-2) and it was indicated that these revised rates will come into effect immediately. Mr. B. Chakraborty, the learned Counsel compares the earlier toll rates and the revised rates to project that the rates were increased by nearly double and hence the value of ferry settlement was fixed at about 70% above the previous settlement value because of the revised toll rates. However despite earnest representation of the ferry operator, the lessee is not permitted to collect the revised toll from the passengers and for the goods carried by the IWT ferries and that is how, the operator is facing loss because of the high value of the present settlement. In view of above, let Notice returnable in 4 weeks be issued. Ms. B. Bhuyan the learned Standing Counsel, IWT accepts notice for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3. Notice for the respondent NO.1 be served through Ms. K. Dutta, the learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department. Necessary extra copies be furnished to the both the lawyers and the name of the Standing Counsel, Transport Department should be reflected Page No.# 7/7 in the cause list and in the case records. In the interim, as the petitioner has paid the last years entire kist and this year kist is due on 1.4.2016, on deposit of the 50% of the kist amount by the due date, coercive step should not be taken against the current settlement holder of the Sadiya Saikhuwa Ferry Service for payment of lesser amount. In the meantime, the authorities may consider whether the operators can be allowed to collect tolls at the revised rate.” 8. In terms of the above aforesaid report dated 14.02.2025, the interim order dated 18.03.2016 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. 9. It is accordingly provided that the security money deposited by the petitioner at the time of settlement shall be released by the Department to the petitioner within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. In view of the foregoing, nothing survives for adjudication and the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 11. A copy of the correspondence dated 17.02.2025 alongwith the report dated 14.02.2025 is kept on record and marked as ‘X’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant