Disposed

Syed Hazlul Hoque and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2022WP(C)/5365/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners hold a government-allotted plot of land since 2006 and sought protection against eviction without due process. The Court disposed of the petition at the motion hearing stage, ensuring their possession is not disturbed unlawfully.

What did the court decide?

Direction that the possession of the petitioners shall not be disturbed without following the due process of law.

Syed Hazlul Hoque and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010162032022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5365/2022

¶5

SYED HAZLUL HOQUE AND ANR S/O. LT. GAJI ALI AHMED, VILL. NO.1, MADGHARIYA, KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI.

¶6

2: SYEDA ASHIJAN KAZI W/O. SYED HAZIUL HOQUE VILL. NO. 1 MADGHARIYA KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

TO BE REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

¶10

2:SECRETARY

¶11

TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

¶12

3:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶13

KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI PIN-781001.

¶14

4:CIRCLE OFFICER

¶15

DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE GUWAHATI PIN-781028.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

5:SETTLEMENT OFFICER

¶18

GUWAHATI RESETTLEMENT DEPTT. GUWAHATI PIN-781001.

¶19

6:COMMISSIONER

¶20

GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GUWAHATI PIN-781001

¶21

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN

¶22

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE

¶23

BEFORE

¶24

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Date : 07-09-2022

¶27

Heard Mr. M.H. Mazarbhuiyan, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners.

¶28

Perused the averments made in the writ petition.

¶29

Mr. Mazarbhuiyan submits that the plot of land measuring 1K-10L covered by Dag No. 294 of village No. 1 Madghariya under Beltola mouza was allotted by the Government in favour of the petitioners by the order dated 26-10-2006 and since then, the petitioners have in peaceful possession of the said plot of land. However, in view of the spate of evictions initiated by the Government over the past few days, the petitioners are apprehending that an attempt may be made to evict them also from the land in question without following the due process of law.

¶30

Page No.# 3/3

¶31

In support of the above argument, Mr. Mazarbhuiyan has invited the attention of this Court to the documents annexed as Annexures 1 to 3 to the writ petition which prima facie establishes the case of the petitioners.

¶32

Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Mr. M. Chetia, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel, GMC have submitted in their usual fairness that since there is some document to show that the plot of land was allotted in favour of the petitioners, they will not be evicted without following the due process of law. However, according to the learned departmental counsel, there is no move to evict the petitioners at this point of time. As such, the writ petition is not maintainable.

¶33

Be that as it may, in view of the documents annexed to the writ petition and taking note of the apprehension expressed by the petitioners, I dispose of this writ petition at the stage of motion hearing by providing that the possession of the petitioners in respect of the land occupied by them by virtue of the Govt. order dated 26-10-2006 (Annexure1), shall not be disturbed without following the due process of law.

¶34

With the above observation, this writ petition stands closed.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Syed Hazlul Hoque and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Hazlul Hoque and Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vedang Radio Technology Private Limited, and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 14 Ors.

Safar Uddin Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Matilal Dey Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Subir Sarkar and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

MD Samsuddin Ahmed Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Manju Begum Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.