ORDER

25.01.2024 Date :

Issue notice making it returnable on 23.02.2024.

2. Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3; Mrs. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam appears on behalf of the respondent No.4 & 5 and Mr. S. Borthakur appears on behalf of the respondent No.6. As the respondent Nos.1 to 6 are duly represented, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon them during the course of the day.

3. As regards the respondent No.7, the petitioner is directed to take steps by way of registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within three days.

4. The petitioner is further directed to take steps upon the respondent No.7 by way of dasti routed through the Registry of this Court and file an affidavit of service on or before the next date.

5. The case of the petitioner herein is that the Ojabora Meen Mahal was settled by the Mising Autonomous Council in favour of the petitioner for the period from 01.07.2022 to 30.06.2024 vide the communication dated 05.08.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent Fishery Department has also settled with the respondent No.7, a 60% Fishery in the name and style of Chaiduar Khoroibeel Meen Mahal under Biswanath Sub-Division of Sonitpur District. In view of the said settlement made on behalf of the respondent No.7, the Fishery Department of the Government of Assam as well as the respondent No.7 have been actively taken steps for the purpose of evicting the petitioner and in that regard had issued a notice dated 22.12.2023. On account of interference so caused by the Fishery Department of the Government of Assam as well as the respondent No.7, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking interference.

6. I have also heard Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Fishery Department of the Government of Assam who submitted that the Chaiduar Khoroibeel Fishery is located at Biswanath District and is an outright 60% Government Fishery which has been settled by the Government of Assam in favour of the respondent No.7 by way of a tender process. The learned counsel for the Fishery Department further submitted that till date, there is no Government decision regarding transfer of fisheries falling partly or fully within Mising Autonomous Council area and in that regard, the Tribal Affairs (Plain) Department which is the parent Department of the Mising Autonomous Council had written a letter to the Government of Assam in the Fishery Department seeking issuance of a No Objection Certificate for allotment/transfer of Meen Mahal etc. under the Mising Autonomous Council area. However, the Government in the Fishery Department has not accorded any such permission. It is therefore the submission of Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Fishery Department of the Government of Assam that the entire settling of the Fishery in favour of the petitioner is nonest as the Mising Autonomous Council does not have the jurisdiction to do so. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Fishery Department placed certain documents. It is the opinion of this Court, the same be brought on record by way of an affidavit.

7. This Court had also heard Mr. S. Borthakur, the learned counsel for the Mising Autonomous Council who submitted that in view of Section 18 of the Mising Autonomous Council Act, 1995, the General Council of the Mising Autonomous Council shall have executive powers in relation to the Council area over various subjects including fisheries, and as such, irrespectively of the fact whether Fishery Department of the Government of Assam granted permission or not; by operation of law on the basis of the Mising Autonomous Council Act, 1995, the Mising Autonomous Council has the jurisdiction to grant settlement in respect to the fisheries falling within the Council area. The learned counsel for the Mising Autonomous Council further submitted that in view of the freq