WP(C) 5946/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE T VAIPHEI Heard Mr I Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr G Soren, the learned GA. This writ petition is directed against the delay in finalisation of the tender p rocess for fishery in respect of No. 22 Bangalmari Pabhamari Fishery. The fishe ry in question is a 60% category and the Rules of 1953 mandates settlement of su ch fisheries by tender system. After expiry of the earlier settlement, the said fishery was settled vide order dated 22.01.2009 in favour of one Bamgaon Matshy ajibi Self Help Group. The said settlement order also came to be challenged by w ay of a writ petition being WP(C) No. 763 of 2009, whereupon this Court by the o rder dated 17.12.2009 set aside the settlement order dated 22.01.2009 and direct ed for completion of the tender process within a period of three weeks. As this order was passed in the presence of the learned GA, the State respondents must have been aware of the said order. Be that as it may, in pursuance of the order dated 17.12.2009, the respondent No. 2 issued the notice dated 7.4.2010 for set tlement of the fishery for a period of three years. This tender process was sub sequently abandoned as the bids submitted in the said tender were from individua ls, which is not permissible under the provisions of the Assam Fishery Rules , 1 953. As the other tender process has been cancelled, the respondent No. 2 after a long delay issued the notice dated 04.08.2010 for settlement of the fishery f or three years. In response to the tender notice, the petitioner submitted its bids complete in all respects @ Rs. 1,27,073/=. According to the petitioner, on the basis of the bids a comparative statement was prepared by the respondents No. 2, in which it s bids was evaluated as the highest bid as the first bidder withdrew its bid. N otwithstanding this, the respondents have deliberately delayed finalisation of t he tender process. This is how this writ petition has been filed. In the course of motion hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner makes a limited prayer and prays that the writ petition can be disposed of at th is stage by issuing an appropriate order to the State respondents. The prayer i s not opposed by the learned counsel for the State respondents. It is imperativ e that the tender process should be completed expeditiously in public interest. In the premises stated above, this writ petition is disposed of by direc ting the State respondents, particularly the respondent No. 1 to complete the te nder process in accordance with law. Thus, the entire process for settlement of No. 22 Bangalmari Pabhamari Fishery shall be completed within a period of fifte en days from the date of receipt of this order.