JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. J.I. Barbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners. Also heard Ms. K. Phukan, learned Government advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

2. In this writ petition, the NIT dated 9.1.2019 issued by the respondent No. 5, inviting bids for settlement of No. 11, Kalong Nadi Part-V Fishery has been challenged by the petitioner. For a just decision on the controversy raised in the writ petition it would be necessary for this court to briefly refer to the factual background of this case.

3. It appears from the record that sometime in the month of August-September 2015, the authorities had issued an NIT for settlement of No. 11, Kalong Nadi Part-V Fishery for a period of seven years. However, since only two bidders had responded to the said NIT, the tender process was cancelled and the Deputy Commissioner of the District, i.e., the respondent No. 5 had issued re-tender notice dated 23.12.2015 inviting fresh bids for settlement of the aforesaid fishery. In response to the NIT dated 23.12.2015 altogether six bidders including the writ petitioner herein had participated. Upon opening the bids, comparative statement was prepared and the sa