Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Dakhin Salmara Matsyajibi Fishery Co-Operative Societies Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam, Fishery Department And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/3232/2024, WP(C)/2013/2024
Decided On : 25-07-2024
FISHERY - Fisheries Settlement Dispute - Assam Panchayat Act, 1994; Assam Land & Revenue Regulation, 1886; Indian Fisheries Act, 1897 - The court discussed the administrative control over fisheries as per the Assam Land & Revenue Regulation, 1886, and the Indian Fisheries Act, 1897, emphasizing that the Fishery Department holds the authority to manage natural water bodies. The court highlighted the need for clarification on overlapping fisheries and the cancellation of conflicting settlements, which influenced its decision to direct further verification and a decision from the Chief Secretary regarding administrative control.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner in WP(C) 3232/2024 claimed settlement of the 3/89 Bhangamore Jingiram Part-I & Part-II Fishery for 7 years, while the petitioner in WP(C) 2013/2024 contested a settlement of the overlapping Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Part-I Jinjiram Fishery by the Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat. Both petitions arose from disputes over overlapping fisheries and conflicting settlements.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the overlapping of the fisheries indicated a need for clarification on whether they were distinct entities or the same fishery under different names. The cancellation of the NIT for the Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Fishery rendered WP(C) 3232/2024 infructuous, while WP(C) 2013/2024 was also deemed infructuous due to the expiration of the settlement period.
Issues: The primary issues included the administrative control over the fisheries in question, the validity of the settlements made by different authorities, and the overlapping nature of the fisheries.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the Fishery Department's administrative control over natural water bodies as established by the Assam Land & Revenue Regulation, 1886, and the Indian Fisheries Act, 1897. It determined that conflicting settlements by the Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat lacked authority and required a verification process to clarify the status of the fisheries.
Final Decision: The court disposed of both writ petitions, directing the Chief Secretary to make a decision on the administrative control of the fisheries after a verification report from the District Commissioners, and prohibited the issuance of any new NITs for the fisheries until a decision was reached.
ORDER :
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Heard Mr. A.F.N.U. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 3232/2024 and Mr. M.U. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) 2013/2024. Also heard Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Standing Counsel, Fishery Department; Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD Department and Mr. S.R. Baruah, learned counsel for the State respondents.
2. Both the writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.
WP(C) 3232/2024
3. The petitioner’s case in WP(C) 3232/2024 is to the effect that the 3/89 Bhangamore Jingiram Part-I & Part-II Fishery in South Salmara Mankachar district was settled with the petitioner Society for a period of 7 years, vide order dated 01.02.2024 issued by the Fishery Department, specifically, the respondent No.4 in WP(C) 3232/2024. The petitioner’s grievance is that the respondent Nos.7 & 8, i.e., Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat, Chirakuti have published an NIT dated nil for settlement of the said same fishery by giving it a different name, i.e., Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Part-I Jinjiram Fishery.
4. This Court passed an order dated 26.06.2024 in WP(C) 3232/2024, directing that a joint verification should be made by the District Commissioners of South Salmara Mankachar District and Dhubri district, to clarify whether the 3/89 Bhangamore Jingiram Part-I & Part-II Fishery, which has been settled with the petitioner, overlapped the Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Part-I Jinjiram Fishery, which had been published for regular settlement in the NIT dated nil issued by the respondent No.7. The joint verification was to clarify as to whether the area of 3/89 Bhangamore Jingiram Part-I & Part-II Fishery was wholly or partly within South Salmara Mankachar district or within Dhubri district.
5. Mr. S.R. Baruah, learned counsel for the State respondents submits that the direction passed by this Court for a joint verification, in terms of the order dated 26.06.2024 passed in WP(C) 3232/2024, has not been undertaken by the two District Commissioners Offices till date. He accordingly prays for time to enable the two offices to make a spot verification.
6. Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the P&RD Department submits that the NIT dated nil, by which a new settlement was sought to be given by the Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat over the fishery, which had already been settled by the Fishery Department with the petitioner, has now been cancelled vide letter dated 29.06.2024 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, P&RD Department. He accordingly submits that WP(C) 3232/2024 has become infructuous.
WP(C) 2013/2024
7. In WP(C) 2013/2024, the case of the petitioner was that he had been settled with the Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Part-I Jinjiram Fishery by the Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat with approval of the Zilla Parishad, Dhubri on 18.10.2023 and the settlement period of the said fishery expired on 30.06.2024. The petitioner’s grievance in WP(C) 2013/2024 is that the Airkata Bridge Moirakuchi Part-I Jinjiram Fishery overlaps the 3/89 Bhangamore Jingiram Part-I & Part-II Fishery, which has been settled by the Fishery Department with the petitioner in WP(C) 3232/2024. Accordingly, the petitioner in WP(C) 2013/2024 has prayed for setting aside the order dated 01.02.2024, by which the said fishery had been settled by the Fishery Department with the petitioner in WP(C) 3232/2024.
8. Mr. P. Sarma, learned counsel for the Fishery Department submits that the P&RD Department and the Jamadarhat Anchalik Panchayat do not have any competency to settle the said fishery with any person, as it is a government fishery. In this regard, he has relied upon the Order No. FISH.224/2014 dated 07.03.2017, issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fishery Department, which is to the effect that administrative control over all natural water bodies, dead river courses, river tributaries and reservoirs vests with the Fishery Department henceforth.
9. Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel
The Fishery Department has exclusive administrative control over natural water bodies, and conflicting settlements by other authorities are invalid unless clarified through proper administrative chan....
The Mising Autonomous Council lacks jurisdiction to settle fisheries as per the Assam Land & Revenue Regulation and the Fishery Rules, which vest authority in the Fishery Department.
Co-operative Society’ -It is for the Settling Authority in the Fishery Department, Government of Assam to examine the enforceability of the Notification in the context of its publication or non-publi....
Under the powers which can be traced to Regulation 16 and Regulation 155 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 read with Section 6 of the Indian Fisheries Act, 1897 that enables a Deputy Com....
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....
Tender disqualification must adhere strictly to statutory rules, excluding arbitrary criteria. A co-operative society's corporate identity shields it from the personal liabilities of its members. Add....
The impugned order was set aside due to gross arbitrariness, unreasonableness, and abuse of power in exercising the authority to allocate the 2nd Class Fishery.
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
