WP(C) 1903/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Heard Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Dr. B. Ah med, learned counsel who appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2. By this writ petition the petitioner who is the settlement holder of Auti-Bauti Min Mahal, is making a grievance of non-consideration of his representation fo r extension of the term of lease for the said fishery and also the steps taken b y the respondents to advertise the fishery for fresh settlement. This Court by interim order dt. 26.4.07 permitted the counsel for the respondent Corpn. To receive instruction as to whether they are prepared to consider the r epresentation made by the petitioner. Dr. B. Ahmed, learned counsel on instruction submits that they would consider th e representation made by the petitioner, for extension with due regard to merit of the claim and depending upon the decision taken on the extension prayer made by the petitioner further decision whether to settle the fishery afresh or not w ould be taken by the respondent Corporation. In view of the above decision, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits th at a direction may be given for disposal of the representation within a short ti me. The above prayer is accepted. The respondents are directed to dispose of the representation for extension made by the petitioner. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision tak en, liberty is given to re-approach this Court. With the above direction the writ petition is disposed of.