ABDUL WAHAB Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed being aggrieved by non-consideration of a representation dtd. 25/3/2019 submitted by the petitioner before the Director, Inland Water Transport Department, Assam seeking compensation under Rule 34 of the Control and Management of Ferries Rules, 1968 (hereinafter the Rules of 1968) for recovery of the loss of revenue allegedly incurred by the petitioner. The prayer made in the writ petition reads as follows:-

(2.) I have heard Shri N. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Ms. M. D. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department who has also filed affidavit-in-opposition in this case on 2/8/2019.

(3.) The projected case of the petitioner is that vide an order dtd. 8/3/2018, the petitioner was offered a settlement order for Guwahati-Kirakara and Guwahati Moumari Ferry Service, consequent upon which an agreement was entered into for the period from 1/4/2018 to 31/3/2019 Accordingly, the petitioner had started operation of the ferry service. However, vide an order dtd. 3/1/2019, the said service was cancelled. The cancellation order however reflects that the same was done pursuant to a judgment dtd. 17/9/2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 2719/2018 and 3112/2018. The aforesaid order of cancellation was the subject matter of challenge by the petitioner by filing WP(C) No. 355/2019. The aforesaid WP(C) No. 355/2019 was disposed of vide order dtd. 23/1/2019 giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Director by filing a representation. Accordingly, on 30/1/2019, representation was submitted followed by another representation on 25/3/2019 wherein a claim for compensation under Rule 34 of the aforesaid Rules has also been made. As according to the petitioner, the said representation was not considered, the instant writ petition has been filed.