Disposed

Manju Taye v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2022WP(C)/1266/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for expeditious disposal of a case regarding land record correction. The Court directed the Circle Officer to record the discrepancies noticed in the records and inform the petitioner within a month to take necessary legal recourse, thereby disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed Circle Officer to record discrepancies and inform petitioner within one month; Petitioner to take legal recourse. Petition disposed.

Manju Taye Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010027882022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1266/2022

¶5

MANJU TAYE W/O MOHAN CH. TAYE R/O RAMNAGAR P.O. AND P.S. DULIAJAN DIST. DIBRUGARH

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶8

REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, LANA AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

¶9

2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM

¶10

GUWAHATI-781001

¶11

3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

¶12

DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE

¶13

BASISTHA CHARIALI GUWAHATI-28.

¶14

4:SMT. KHAN AIM PHUKAN W/O SRI BENU PHUKAN R/O SOUTHERN VIEW APARTMENT

¶15

BHETAPARA GHORAMARA ROAD

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

P.S. HATIGAON GUWAHATI-28

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M DAIMARY

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 07-09-2022

¶23

Heard Ms. S Doley, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R Borpujari, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 being the authorities under the Land and Revenue Department, Ms. M Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondents no. 2 and 3 being the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup(M) and the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle, respectively, as well as Ms. N Rahman, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 Smti. Khanaim Phukan.

¶24

The petitioner had instituted a Misc. Case No. 82/2015-16, which had been renumbered as Misc. Case No. 218/2021 before the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle for correction of the jamabandi in respect of the land of the petitioner. In furthering the process in Misc. Case No. 82/2015-16 (renumbered as Misc. Case No. 218/2021), the file was transmitted to the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup(M) and thereupon, the file was numbered as KRC Case No. 320/2016.

¶25

In this writ petition, the petitioner claims for a direction to the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle to expeditiously dispose of the KRC Case No. 320/2016 arising out of Misc. Case No. 82/2015-16 (renumbered as Misc. Case No. 218/2021).

¶26

Ms. M Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate upon obtaining the instruction states that the Circle Officer upon considering the Misc. Case filed by the petitioner came across the materials on records which shows that there is a discrepancy in the Dag Nos. appearing the official records and that of the Dag Nos. mentioned by the petitioner in her claim. It is stated that because of such discrepancy, the Circle Officer is unable to give a final

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

consideration to KRC Case No. 320/2016 arising out of Misc. Case No. 82/2015-16 (renumbered as Misc. Case No. 218/2021).

¶29

If the matter is pending before the Circle Officer and the same cannot be given a final consideration because of the discrepancies noticed by the Circle Officer, we are of the view that Circle Officer may pass an order recording such discrepancies and inform the petitioner accordingly and thereupon, the petitioner may take necessary recourse of law as may be available.

¶30

The necessity be done by the Circle Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶31

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Manju Taye v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manju Taye v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jericho Detergent Pvt. Limited and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Sunita Agarwal Vs the Securities and Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Nirmala Didwania Vs the Securities and Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Bidut Bakshi @ Bidyut Bakshi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dhani Ram Baruah and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Subodh Kumar Singh