Writ petition challenging eviction from state land dismissed. Court found petitioners hold valid allotments of government khas land and do not possess disputed vacant land, negating the cause of action.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010027532021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1263/2021
TAHMINA BIBI AND ANR
W/O- HASEM ALI, R/O- VILL- BHIMAPARA, P.O. HATSINGIMARI, P.S. SOUTH SALMARA, DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN783135
2: SYED ALI SHEIKH S/O- KOBAD ALI SHEIKH R/O- VILL- FULERCHAR PART-II P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78313
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPTT., ASSAM, DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DISTRICT HATSINGIMARI PIN- 783135
3:THE ADDL. DY. COMMISSIONER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DISTRICT HATSINGIMARI PIN- 783135
4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER OF MANKACHAR REVENUE CIRCLE MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78313
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
order
10.03.2021
Heard Mr. P A Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners.
In terms of the order dated 26.02.2021, Ms. K Phukan, the learned State counsel had received the necessary instruction from the Additional Deputy Commissioner, South Salmara Mankachar, Hatsingimari vide his letter dated 09.03.2021 which is extracted hereinbelow:
“GOVT OF ASSAM
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DISTRICT
HATSINGIMARI
(REVENUE BRANCH)
No. HRS-14/2021/38 dated Hatsingimari the 09.03.2021
Sub: Submission of instruction in WP(C) No. 1263/2021 (Tahmina Bibi & Another – vs- State of Assam & Ors.)
Ref: No. Jr. GA/KP/21/2076 dated 26.02.2021
Sir,
With reference to the subject cited above, I have the honour to inform you that the petitioner No. 1 Tahmina Bibi and No. 2 Syed Ali Sheikh are not affected by erosion
Page No.# 3/4
by river Brahmaputra. The petitioners are illegally occupying Govt. Khas land measuring 0B 2K 10L covered by Dag No. 158/476 at Revenue village: Bhimapra by erecting temporary residential houses since last 25 years. Further it is submitted that the Land Advisory Committee has approved and allotted the Govt. Khas land measuring 1K-5L in favour of the petitioner No. 1, land measuring 1K-5L in favour of Abu Taher (son of the petitioner No. 1), total land measuring 3K-15L in favour of the family of the petitioner No. 1 and land measuring 1K-5L in favour of the petitioner No. 2 grand total land measuring 1B-1K-5L covered by Dag No. 158/476 in village Bhimapara under Mankachar Revenue Circle as they have been in possession of this land since more than 25 years.
The petitioner never possessed any part of the land of Govt. Khas land covering Dag No. 172/442 at Revenue village Bhimapara under Mankachar Revenue Circle as seen from the Circle Officer’s report, which was lying vacant at the disposal of the Govt. out of which land measuring 2B-1K-5L has been allotted to the 9 nos. allottees.
These allotees are presently in possession of their allotted land.
The petitioners were never in possession of any part of Dag No. 172/442 as alleged as such the question of developing the land does not arise.
That, as regards contents of the case of the writ petition, it is submitted that the Govt. Khas land of Dag No. 158/476 have been allotted in favour of the petitioners. As such, presently they are not landless persons as alleged in the writ. The copy of allotment to the petitioner are annexed (I to V).
The 9 Nos. of allottees who were allotted in Dag No. 172/442 are also annexed at No. VI to XIV.
This is submitted for favour of your kind information and necessary action.
Your faithfully,
Addl. Deputy Commissioner, South Salmara Mankachar
Hatsingimari.”
Page No.# 4/4
From the aforesaid written instruction it is found that the petitioners were allotted Government Khas land and the petitioners are never in possession of Dag No. 172/442 on the ground that 9 numbers of allottees were allotted land out the said Dag No. 172/442 and land allotted to the petitioners are covered by Government Khas Dag No. 158/476. The petitioners were allotted as per the Land Policy of the State and thereafter if the petitioners are occupying further Government khas land then there is every possibility of the petitioners being evicted from the unauthorized occupation of Government khas land and this court cannot restrain the lawful exercise in carrying out the eviction process by the respondent State.
In view of the same, no cause of action survives in this writ petition which stands dismissed at this motion stage. The letter dated 09.03.2021 is kept on record.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives given that petitioners are not established as landless persons with unauthorized possession of Government Khas land.
TAHMINA BIBI
SYED ALI SHEIKH
STATE OF ASSAM
PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
