Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/3412/2026 of THE REGIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANR Vs BIPUL DAS AND ORS on 22 September 2026
GAHC010209912026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3412/2026 THE REGIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANR NORTH EASTERN REGION LGBI AIRPORT GUWAHATI 781015 ASSAN 2: AAI CARGO LOGISTICS AND
GAHC010209912026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3412/2026
THE REGIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA
AND ANR
NORTH EASTERN REGION LGBI AIRPORT GUWAHATI 781015 ASSAN
2: AAI CARGO LOGISTICS AND ALLIED SERVICES COMPANY LTD.
(AAICLAS)
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (CARGO) NORTH EASTERN
REGION
LOKPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
GUWAHATI- 781015
ASSAM
VERSUS
BIPUL DAS AND ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006, ASSAM.
2:FARHAM MANDAL T. SANGMA
S/O ABDUS SIDDIQUE MANDAL
MATU COMPLEX
VIP ROAD
SIXMILE
GUWAHATI 781022
ASSAM.
3:KAMAL JYOTI KASHYAP
S/O SATYAJIT ROY
JAPORIGOG GAON BURHA PATH
H NO 4
GUWAHATI 5
ASSAM.
4:ARISTONE MANBHA RYNDONGSNGI
S/O ALBERT P. SHADAP
80 LEW MAWLONG
NONGPOH
P.O. NONGPOH
DIST. RI BHOI
MEGHALAYA -793102.
5:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
DEPTT OF FISHERIES GOVT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 ASSAM
6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
ASSAM.
7:THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES
DIRECTORATE OF FISHERIES
MEEN BHAWAN
GOPINATH NAGAR
GUWAHATI 781016
ASSAM.
8:THE ASSAM STATE BIODIVERSITY BOARD
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL PCCF BIODIVERSITY AND MEMBER
SECRETARY ASBB
ARANYA BHAWAN
2ND FLOOR
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI 781037
ASSAM.
9:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
AZARA POLICE STATION
DISTRICT KAMRUP METROPOLITAN
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R DUBEY, MRS A B KAYASTHA,MR. A N I HUSSAIN,MS N
B KAYASTHA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. N UPADHAYAY,SC, FISHERY
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 23.09.2026
Heard Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel, appearing for the applicants. Also heard Mr. U.S. Borah, learned counsel, appearing for the opposite parties respondents.
2. The present Interlocutory Application, has been instituted, praying for a modification of the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2026 in WP(C).No.5093/2026.
3. This Court vide order dated 18.09.2026, considering the urgency expressed by the respondents , i.e., the petitioners in the connected writ petition, who were required to effect supplies of fishes to a German Firm, in terms of a supply order placed with them, had required the Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, to take steps, in the manner as directed by this Court, for ascertaining as to whether the consignments of fishes, which are sought to be transported by the opposite parties/petitioners in the writ petition to Germany, included any protected species which is endangered and included in the Schedule to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
4. The Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, in the present Interlocutory Application has projected that, he had taken all the possible steps for constitution of a Committee to examine the fishes being transported by the petitioners. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the petitioners in the connected writ petition had only approached the Airport Authority of India, by way of submission of a representation and had not produced the consignment of fishes before them. Further no certificate, certifying that no scheduled species is being sought to be transported, was also not brought on record. It is submitted that on account of shortage of time, as the consignment was to reach Frankfurt, Germany, by today, the matter could not be further processed.
5. On a query made by this Court to the learned counsel for the respondents, i.e., the petitioners in WP(C).No.5093/2026, as to whether they had any certificate, certifying that no scheduled species of fishes is being transported, the learned counsel for the respondents, has fairly submitted that no such certificate is available with them.
6. In view of the above position, and also considering the directions passed by this Court vide Judgment & Order dated 17.07.2026 in WP(C).No1743/2025, as well as the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 08.09.2026 in WP(C).No.4914/2026, this Court recalls the interim directions passed vide order dated 18.09.2026 in
WP(C).No.5093/2026.
7. In view of the fact that interim directions passed vide order dated 18.09.2026 in WP(C).No.5093/2026, being recalled, the Regional Executive Director, Airport Authority of India, would now be not required to comply with the same.
8. With the above, the present interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant