Dismissed

Mina Jaiswal @ Mina Devi v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Oct 2021WP(C)/5281/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged eviction of the petitioner by her sons and alleged inaction by police and administrative authorities. The Court dismissed the petition for lack of prima facie material showing rejection of her approach, distinguishing cited precedents.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition rejected; liberty granted to approach the appropriate authority to first make the claim.

Mina Jaiswal @ Mina Devi Vs the State of Assam… — Succession and Inheritance | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010140812021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5281/2021

¶5

MINA JAISWAL @ MINA DEVI W/O LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD JAISWAL, ADD. NAWGHAT, P.O. CHUNGAJAN SUB DIVISION DHANSIRI, PIN 785601, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GOLAGHAT.

¶8

2:THE ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICER IN CHARGE CHUNGAJAN POLICE STATION.

¶9

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT (REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT)

¶10

4:THE DIST. LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE L.D. SECY. OF DLSA GOLAGHAT

¶12

5:SANTOSH KUMAR JAISHWAL

¶13

S/O LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD JAISWAL ADDRESS NAWGHAT P.O CHUNGAJAN SUB DIVISION DHANSIRI PIN 785601 DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

6:RUPESH KUMAR JAISHWAL

¶16

S/O LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD JAISWAL ADDRESS NAWGHAT P.O. CHUNGAJAN SUB DIVISION DHANSIRI PIN 785601 DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : SWATI. B. BARUAH (TG)

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶21

05/10/2021

¶22

Heard Ms. S B Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M Barman, learned Government Advocate, Assam for all the official respondent Nos. 1 to 6.

¶23

Petitioner is a resident of Nawghat, under Chungajan Police Station, Sub-DivisionDhansiri in the district of Golaghat, Assam. Petitioner’s husband had a Grocery shop at Chungajan. Petitioner’s family consisted of her husband, two sons and two daughters. Her sons and daughters were married and her sons used to live separately where the married daughters are living in their respective matrimonial homes. The husband of the petitioner expired on 07.05.2021 at Gauhati Medical College & Hospital because of COVID 19. After the death of her husband, her sons, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 came to her house at Nawghat, Dhansiri and forcefully took over the said Grocery shop of her husband as well as the land measuring about 1½ Katha at Chungajan that was purchased by her and her husband during his lifetime and further, she was thrown out of her own house by her sons, these two respondent Nos. 5 & 6, because of which she is now residing with her younger daughter at Hojai.

¶24

It is stated that she being an aged widow, during the lockdown period of Pandemic

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

COVID-19 could not reach out and as such, she approached the concerned Goanburha and the Panchayat for redressal of her grievances against her said two sons being aggrieved with their action. But as she did not get any response and cooperation from them, she approached the Chungajan Police Station, but her plea was not even considered by the said police authority.

¶27

It is also stated that on 29.06.2021, petitioner made a Deed of Will before the Senior Sub-Registrar of Kamrup (M), Guwahati appointing her elder daughter as a trustee to look after her property. It is also stated that as she is receiving threats from her two sons, petitioner is scared to go back to Nawghat, Chungajan, Dhansiri as she is apprehending that there is all possibility that her these two sons might kill her. Petitioner also stated that she on 29.06.2021 by swearing an affidavit disowned her said two sons.

¶28

Hence, this writ petition by the petitioner praying amongst others for a direction to (i) the Officer-in-Charge of Chungajan Police Station to register a case against the respondent Nos. 4 & 5; (ii) the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat to evict the occupier of her property left behind by her late husband and (iii) to direct the District Legal Services Authority, Golaghat to provide all legal possible help to her.

¶29

It is seen that the petitioner in this petition did not specify as to when she approached the Officer-in-Charge of her local Police Station at Chungajan or when did she approached or wrote to the Superintendent of Police, Golaghat regarding her grievances against her two sons, the respondent Nos. 5 and 6. Moreover, the petitioner has also failed to place any such application that she had filed before the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat pertaining to the property left behind her husband nor as to when she approached the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Golaghat to provide her necessary legal assistance.

¶30

The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the Assistant Commissioner of Sale Tax and Others Vs. M/s. Commercial Steel Limited, decided on 03.09.2021 as well as the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Mr. Sobham Mazumdar Vs. Mr. Raja Sarkar, decided on 23.07.2021 placed by Ms. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner, on

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

perusal found that these are not applicable to the present case.

¶33

In the absence of any such materials before the Court regarding such claim of the petitioner that the authority did not consider her case or rejected her claim, the Court in the exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot consider the prayers made by the petitioner in this writ petition.

¶34

However, it is made clear that if on the approach of the petitioner either before the Officer-in-Charge of her local police Station at Chungajan or the Superintendent of Police, Golaghat or the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat and the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Golaghat, if her queries are not considered by these authorities, the petitioner may always approach the appropriate forum for redressal of her grievances.

¶35

Finding no such basis in the matter, this writ petition, being devoid of merit stands rejected, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority first and thereafter, to make her claim accordingly.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Mina Jaiswal @ Mina Devi v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mina Jaiswal @ Mina Devi v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Ganesh Beez Bhandar Vs a.K.Ghosh and 3 Ors.

Baby Dey Kanangoe Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Purnima Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

The Indian Institute of Bank Managenent and 3 Ors. Vs Amulya Kumar Goswami

Safiur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sajul Islam Barbhuyan Vs Rongpur Co-Operative Society Ltd. and 9 Ors.