The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order directing cancellation of land allotment. The court held it could not decide disputed questions of possession under Article 226.
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.# 1/3
GAHC010064442022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2428/2022
MOHIDUR ISLAM
S/O- KOPSAR ALI, VILL. AND P.O. HATSINGIMARI, P.S. SOUTH SALMARA, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 783136.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY.-06
2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-32
3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR HATSINGIMARI P.O. HATSINGIMARI DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783136.
4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MANKACHAR REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. MANKACHAR DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783131.
5:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER OF MANKACHAR REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. MANKACHAR DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM PIN- 783131.
6:MOMINUL ISLAM S/O- KOPSAR ALI VILL. CHOTO BOZRA P.O. HAZIRHAT P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
Date : 04.04.2022
Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Deuri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5.
The instant writ petition has been filed challenging an order dated 09.02.2022 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Revenue Department, South Salmara, Mankachar, Hatsingimari whereby a direction was issued to the Assisstant Settlement Officer, Mankachar Revenue Circle to submit allotment cancellation proposal against the name of the petitioner and to submit a proposal in favour of the respondent No.6 for 1 Katha 5 Lessa of land.
Taking into consideration that the matter would involve disputed questions of facts as to whether the petitioner is in possession or respondent No.6 is in possession, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press the instant writ petition and may avail remedies as available before the
Page No.# 3/3
Civil Courts.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and from a perusal of the order impugned, it reveals that the question as to who is in possession of the disputed land, would be a vital question to be decided which this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not like to go into it.
Considering above and taking into consideration the submission made by the counsel, the instant petitions stands dismissed on withdrawal. However, the dismissal of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner from initiating appropriate remedies as is envisaged under law.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Hon'ble High Court should decide the disputed questions of facts regarding possession of land in a writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MOHIDUR ISLAM
THE STATE OF ASSAM
THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS
THE DY. COMMISSIONER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
THE CIRCLE OFFICER MANKACHAR
THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER OF MANKACHAR
DEVASHIS BARUAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
