WP(C) 3512/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI . The petitioner took settlement of a fishery in February 2007 pursuant to a risk sale notice issued by the Respondents. The period was upto November 2007. He pai d the first installment of revenue and thereafter defaulted. Thereafter, the fis hery of the petitioner was again put to risk sale notice and a Bakijai proceedin g has been contemplated against the petitioner for recovery of the dues payable by him. Aggrieved, this writ petition has been filed. The only ground on which the petitioner has moved the Court seeking a direction for remission of the revenue payable by him or for consideration of his case for such remission by the Government on the basis of the representations filed is t hat there has been scanty rainfall in the Dibrugarh District in which the fisher y is located. The above ground does not satisfy the Court that the present is a fit case for exercise of the high prerogative power vested in the Court under Ar ticle 226 of the Constitution. Writ petition, therefore, is not being entertaine d. It will, however, be open to the State to consider the petitioner’s represent ations and pass orders thereon as may be considered appropriate.