SUBUDH DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Considering the subject matter in dispute and as agreed to by the respective parties, these writ petitions along with the Contempt Petition are taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. Since, the challenge is broadly based on similar grounds, the petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. Suffice it to mention that the challenge pertains to the mode of settlement of Fishery, which according to the petitioners, have been done in total disregard of the Rules and the law holding the field of distribution of State largesse.

(2.) At the outset, it would be relevant to place on record the basic facts of the cases. WP(C) 4495 / 2019 and WP(C) 6541 / 2019 are instituted by one Shri Subudh Das which pertains to No. 32 Doipara Beel of Morigaon district. The petitioner contends that as per an order dated 12.07.2012 issued by the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. (herein after AFDC), he being an actual fisherman belonging to the Scheduled Caste community was settled with the said Fishery for a period of 7 years w.e.f. 2012-2013 till 31.03.2019. It is the case of the petitioner that during the aforesaid period, he had suffered heavy loss for various reasons for which he had submitted an application dated 24.01.2019 before the AFDC praying for extension of the lease. The AFDC had called for a report from district authorities and accordingly such a report was furnished by the Circle Officer, Mayong Revenue Circle on 24.07.2019. Since, no action was taken thereafter, the petitioner had instituted the first writ petition being WP(C) 4495 / 2019. This Court vide order dated 27.06.2019 had directed the learned Standing Counsel of the Corporation to obtain instructions on the issue of grant of extension to the petitioner. However, while the aforesaid matter was pending consideration, an order dated 29.07.2019 was issued by the Managing Director, whereby, the Fishery in question was handed over to Pradip Pramanik and Maharaj Das as stakeholder for a period of 4 (four) years which was to be extended up-to 7 (seven) years. The petitioner alleges that the impugned order was not sustainable in law as the settlement was done without undergoing a tender process. It has further been contended that though a semblance of notice was claimed to be issued in an issue of a newspaper 'Aami Axomor Janagan' dated 14.06.2019, the same was vitiated by fraud inasmuch as only certain selected copies of the issue of the said newspaper had the advertisement whereas such advertisement was not published in the regular issue. It is further been submitted that the said newspaper is hardly circulated and therefore, there was no wide publicity. The petitioner has accordingly prayed for setting aside the impugned arrangement with the private respondent. In connection with the first Writ Petition, the petitioner had also filed Contempt Case No. 516 / 2019 alleging wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 27.06.2019. By the aforesaid order, this Court had observed that though prima facie the claim for extension of the term of the settlement with the petitioner may not be permissible in law as the settlement period had already expired, there was no restraint on the part of the respondent authorities for issuing fresh NIT. The petitioner alleges that the impugned order was issued without taking leave of this Court which amounted to wilful and deliberate disobedience.

(3.) So far as the WP(C) 5952 / 2019 is concerned, the petitioner Dharmeswar Das, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste and is an actual fisherman, was an aspirant to participate in the settlement process of Udari Meen Mahal and had submitted an application dated 10.07.2019 before the Managing Director, AFDC for a total period of 11 (eleven) years at an annual revenue of Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs) only. However, without considering the offer of the petitioner, vide the impugned order dated 15.07.2019, the said fishery was settled in favour of the respondent nos. 5 & 6 for 7 (seven) years at an annual revenue of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) only for the year 2019-20 and 2020-21 and at the rate of Rs.8,40,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Forty Thousand) only from the third year onwards. It is contended that such settlement is in gross violation of the Rules and also the law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court. It is specifically contended that the impugned settlement was done without any publication. As in the earlier petition, though in the affidavit filed by the Corporation, publication in a newspaper 'Aami Axomor Janagan', dated 14.06.2019 has been claimed, the petitioner contends that such publication was a sham publication.