Back
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Dinabandhu nayak, S/o- lt. Layon Ch. Nayak – Appellant
Versus
Assam Fisheries Development Corporation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Sarmah, learned counsel for the AFDC.
2. Both the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment and order, inasmuch as, the subject matter in issue is same in both the cases. The petitioners are also the same in both the cases.
3. The petitioners have prayed for setting aside and quashing the impugned order dated 15.12.2021 and the consequential order dated 08.04.2022 issued by the Managing Director, AFDC Ltd, who is the respondent No.3, by which the settlement of 44 fisheries, including the fishery run by the petitioners, have been cancelled. The petitioners have also prayed for setting aside the tender No.2/2022 and the impugned revised tender notice No.4/2022 issued by the respondent No.3, by which fresh settlement of the fisheries were to be made.
4. The petitioners’ case in brief is that pursuant to an NIT dated 07.07.2015, for settlement of the Borkona Fishery of Barpeta District for 7 years, a settlement order dated 28.08.2015 was issued by the respondent No.3, settling the Borkona Fishery with the petitioners from the financial year 2015-16 to the financial year 2021-2022, i.e
The settlement of fisheries under the PPP mode must adhere to the principles of fairness and transparency, and must be preceded by a tender process in accordance with the rules.
A procedure prescribed by law to do a certain thing in a certain manner must be followed strictly and there cannot be any deviation from such procedure.
The authority of the Managing Director of AFDC to make settlements without calling for a tender and the absence of a rehabilitation package for settlement of fisheries directly to lessees were the ce....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation has no power of direct settlement of fisheries and settlements made without calling for tenders ar....
A party must participate in a tender process to maintain the right to challenge related settlements; acquiescence can bar claims where a party fails to act timely.
Compliance with mandatory tender conditions, including the submission of statutorily verified resolutions and member lists, is essential for a valid bid. Failure to satisfy these stipulated requireme....
Point of law: The review petitioner continued to catch the same amount of fish which was being done from the fishery on regular basis. At least nothing has been stated before this Court in any manner....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
