WP(C) 2805/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.K.MUSAHARY Heard Mr. M.Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr . H.Rahman , learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State Respondents.. The petitioner is a registered fishery self help group formed with 100% actual fishermen of fishing population.The Korha Part I Fishery in the District of Dhemaji , was earlier settled with M/S Parghat Karhaparia Meen Atma Sahayak G oot sometime in the month of October,2005 for a period up to May,2011. Although the aforesaid Fishery Samabai Samitee got the settlement, it could not run the same and it was declared defaulter. The authority concerned decided to go for fr esh settlement of the aforesaid fishery and for that purpose NIT was floated on 18.10.2008 on daily basis on 10 % more revenue than the present annual revenue w ith existing boundary till the final process of fresh tender. Accordingly, the p etitioner society accepted the offer and executed affidavit as required by the a uthority concerned. The petitioner society started running the fishery from 18.9 .2008 to 1.11.2009.The petitioner Group participated in the aforesaid tender pro cess and to avoid any controversy, had stopped fishing from 1.11.2008 and inform ed with due information/ intimation to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji vide let ter dated 22.11.2008 which was received on 26.11.2008 .The acknowledgement of re ceipt of the intimation has been endorsed on the body of the intimation letter. Similarly the Circle Officer, Suwansiri Revenue Circle, was also informed about the same vide letter dated 1.12.2008.The receipt of the aforesaid letter in th e office of the Circle Officer was also acknowledged on 1.12.2008 on the body of the intimation letter. Subsequently, one Shri Gagan Das, President of Parghat K arhaparia meen Atma Sahayak Goot applied through R.T.I for some information from the respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji . Accordingly, the Addl. D.C, Dhem aji vide his letter dated 22.6.2009 informed the Addl. Deputy Commissioner-Cum-P ublic Information Officer, Dhemaji that as per office record an amount of Rs. 77 ,756/- has been paid by the petitioner group and the outstanding amount of Rs. 4 ,89,128/- is remaining unpaid till 15.06.2009. On the basis of the aforesaid letter no follow-up action has been taken by the authority concerned but due to issuance of this letter the prospect of t he petitioner society for getting settlement of fishery has been affected and in fact the petitioner society has been rendered blacklisted although no such orde r has been issued . If the impugned letter is not interfered with or set aside, the petitioner would loose the chance of getting settlement not only in respect of the aforesaid NIT but also in respect of other fishery settlements. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the authorit y concerned never issued any letter /communication informing that there is an outstanding dues to be paid . No notice has been issued upon the petitioner by the respondent-authorities demanding payment of any outstanding revenue dues by the petitioner. According to him there cannot be any outstanding dues to be clea red by the petitioner inasmuch as the petitioner stopped fishing in the fishery in question from 1.11.2008 and the said fact was duly communicated in writing no t only to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji but also to the Circle Officer, Suwan siri Revenue Circle, the receipt of which has been acknowledged as stated earlie r. I have heard Mr.H.Rahman, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State -Respondents. Referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent N o.2 (Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji), he submits that the petitioner group continu ed to run the fishery in question even after the NIT was issued on 18.10.2008 fo r settlement of the fishery until this court restrained the petitioner group fro m operating the said fishery by an order dated 3.7.2009 passed in W.P (C) No. 26 77/2009. He also submits that since the petitioner group was running the fishery till 3.7.2009 , there is an outstanding amount of Rs. 4,89,128/- till 15.6.2009 to be paid by the petitioner. At the time of hearing , the record of the Deputy Commissioner concerned has been made available. I have carefully gone through the same. I have a lso carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties. The basic facts regard ing temporary/stopgap settlement of the fishery in question with the petitioner group and the issuance of NIT and the participation of the petitioner in the sa id tender process are not in dispute. Running of the aforesaid fishery on daily basis at the rate fixed by the authorities is also not in dispute .The petitione r has specifically stated that the fishery was run by the petitioner only up to 1.11.08. It is the clear case of the petitioner that the department had stopped running the fishery w.e.f.1.11.08 with written information to the respondent Dep uty Commissioner and the Revenue Circle Officer, Suwansiri who have acknowledge d receipt of the communication through which the intimation of stoppage of runn ing the fishery has been communicated. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by t he respondent Deputy Commissioner , no denial has been made. However, the respon dent-Deputy Commissioner in his affidavit, stated that the petitioner continued to run the fishery till 15.6.2009.There is no supporting documents to this cla im of the respondents. It appears to be a vague and bald statement. It is surpri sing that inspite of allegation made by the respondent-authority that huge amoun t of Rs. 4,89,128/- is remaining as outstanding , the respondent Deputy Commissi oner or other authorized officer has not issued any demand notice claming payme nt of the outstanding dues from the petitioner. Without making such demand, th e Addl. Deputy Commissioner has issued a letter dated 22.6.09 to the effect that there is an outstanding dues to the tune of Rs. 4,89,128/- from the petitioner . In order to verify the veracity of the said letter, I have turned to letter d ated 30.1.09 (19.2.2009) issued by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji addres sed to the Dy. Secretary to the Govt. of Assam ,Fishery department whereby relev ant information regarding settlement of fishery in question were furnished along with a statement showing the necessary revenue deposit by Shri Khireswar Das, P resident of Parghat Karhaparia meen Atma Sahayak Goot with challan No. and dates of deposit w.e.f. 19.9.2008 to 19.2.2009. As per the said statement the petitio ner group deposited various amounts on various dates amounting to Rs. 75,956/-. The said statement has been signed by an officer non other than the Addl.Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji himself. There is no remark/observation in the said state ment that any outstanding amount is remaining unpaid by the petitioner. In the present case, the Department has not stated whether there is any outstan ding dues to be paid by the petitioner to the Government and that too to the tun e of Rs. 4,89,128/- . In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Addl. Deputy C ommissioner, there is no statement to the effect that the information and the s tatement furnished by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner is not correct and not on th e basis of record maintained by his office. In absence of such denial/ rebutta l it is difficult for the court to accept the stand of the respondent authoritie s that some outstanding revenue is remaining unpaid by the petitioner. It is be yond the understanding of the court that the authorities concerned would not sen d any demand notice claiming payment of such huge revenue arrear from the petiti oner, if it was at all correct and based on records. For the aforesaid discussions, I hold that the impugned communication da ted 22.6.2009 is based on no record and no action on the basis of such communica tion can be initiated against the petitioner.The impugned communication dated 22 .6,2009 is liable to be set aside and quashed. It is ,accordingly quashed and se t aside. The petition stands allowed . Send down the L.C.Rs forthwith.