Disposed

Abu Bakkar Siddik v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC20 Mar 2023WP(C)/1559/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought possession of land due to non-demarcation. The Court disposed of the petition during the motion stage, finding the Circle Officer to be the appropriate authority rather than the Settlement Officer, and directed the Circle Officer to consider the application within four months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to submit fresh representation before the Circle Officer; directed to consider and pass speaking order within 4 months.

Abu Bakkar Siddik Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010051022023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1559/2023

¶5

ABU BAKKAR SIDDIK SON OF LATE HAJI ABDUL GONI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- LEZAM, P.O.- CHUNARI, DISTRICT- GOALPARA, ASSAM.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶8

TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶9

2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM.

¶10

3:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND SETTLEMENT OFFICER

¶11

DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM.

¶12

4:THE ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER CUM CIRCLE OFFICER LAKHIPUR REVENUE CIRCLE DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶17

ORDER

¶18

20.03.2023

¶19

Heard Shri AR Bhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. G Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 1 whereas the State respondents are represented by Ms. S Sarma, learned State Counsel, Assam.

¶20

Considering the nature of the grievance, the writ petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself.

¶21

The petitioner claims to be the Power of Attorney holder of a plot of land covered by Dag Nos. 110 and 111 (old) of Village-Nidanpur Extension Town under Lakhipur Revenue Circle in the district of Goalpara. He alleges that though an application has been made for demarcation, no such demarcation has been done till now.

¶22

Shri Bhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that under the Assam Right to Public Service Act, 2012 (Act of 2012), his application can be considered and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶23

Ms. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, however submits that the application said to have been filed is before the Settlement Officer who may not be the appropriate authority under the Act of 2012. She further submits that it is the Circle Officer which is the appropriate authority to take into consideration the prayer of the petitioner.

¶24

The aforesaid submissions have been duly considered.

¶25

The Government of Assam has enacted the Assam Right to Service Act, 2012 pursuant to which, an Office Memorandum dated 21.12.2020 has also been issued by the Revenue Department which lays down detailed procedure for consideration of the

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

grievance of the present nature.

¶28

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by given liberty to the petitioner to submit fresh representation before the appropriate authority, namely, the Circle Officer, Lakhipur Revenue Circle, District-Goalpara along with all supporting documents and if such an application is submitted, the Circle Officer, Lakhipur Revenue Circle is directed to consider the same and pass speaking order(s).

¶29

It is further observed that while disposing of the said application, notice to the affected parties are to be given and the matter may be disposed of expeditiously and preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of such application.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Abu Bakkar Siddik v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abu Bakkar Siddik 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

Rwirup Muchahary Vs the Stateof Assam and 3 Ors.

Abdul Jalil Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Himani Pathak Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Suman Roy Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Marfat Ali and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.