Partly allowed

Baneswar Mahili and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 May 2024WP(C)/3121/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by legal heirs claiming land allotted in 1952 under RFR Act. Court directed Divisional Forest Officer to hear both parties regarding entitlement to 12 bigha land before adjudicating the recording of names of private respondents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners and private respondents directed to appear before Divisional Forest Officer on 27.05.2024; DFo to hear claims and pass orders within 2 months.

Baneswar Mahili and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and… — Environment and Pollution | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010099692018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3121/2018

¶5

BANESWAR MAHILI AND ANR.

¶6

S/O- LT RUPAWATI MAHILI, VILL- PURANA KAKI, RAMPUR BONGAON, P.O. PURANA KAKI, P.S. KAKI, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM

¶7

2: SUNESWAR MAHILI S/O- LT RUPAWATI MAHILI VILL- PURANA KAKI RAMPUR BONGAON P.O. PURANA KAKI P.S. KAKI DIST- HOJAI ASSA

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS.

¶10

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

¶11

2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST JURIPAR PANJABARI GHY-37

¶12

3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER NAGAON SOUTH DIVISION HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782435

¶13

4:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER KAKI RANGE KAKI DISTRICT

¶14

Page No.# 2/5

¶15

HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782446

¶16

5:RAM ABATH CHAUHAN S/O- GANESH CHAUHAN VILL- RAMPUR BONGAON P.O. PURANA KAKI P.S. KAKI DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782446

¶17

6:RAJKUMAR CHAUHAN S/O- RAM SANKAR CHAUHAN VILL- RAMPUR BONGAON P.O. PURANA KAKI P.S. KAKI DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782446

¶18

7:RAJENDRA CHAUHAN S/O- RAM SANKAR CHAUHAN VILL- RAMPUR BONGAON P.O. PURANA KAKI P.S. KAKI DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782446

¶19

8:SMTI. SARASWATI MAHILI W/O- SRI JAGARU MAHILI R/O- VILL- AZARBARI P.O. AZARBARI P.S. KAKI DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN-78244

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST

¶22

BEFORE

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Date : 02.05.2024

¶27

Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. D. Gogoi, learned standing counsel for the Forest Department, appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 5 to 7.

¶28

The case of the petitioners is that they are the legal heirs of Sew Saran Mahili and they have been residing in the land allotted in the name of their said predecessor-in-interest in the year 1952. It is projected that from a RTI reply received from the Public Information Officer, Divisional Forest Office, Nagaon, South Division, Hojai that the names of private respondent nos. 5 to 8 have been recorded in respect of the said land. It is projected that the entry of the names of the private respondents is in violation of the provisions of Schedule Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. As the representation of the petitioners before the respondent authorities have not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶29

The learned standing counsel for the Forest Department as well as the learned counsel for the private respondents have both opposed the prayers made in this writ petition. However, on a pointed query of the Court as to whether there is any record of the petitioners being heard before the entry of names of the private respondents in respect of their said land, which was allotted in the name of their grandfather (predecessor-in-interest), the learned standing counsel for the Forest Department has submitted that he has not been provided with those documents, if there by any.

¶30

Page No.# 4/5

¶31

As the Court finds that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioners were given an opportunity of being heard before the name of the private respondent nos. 5 to 8 in respect of part of land, which is claimed to be allotted in the name of Sew Saran Mahili, the Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case where the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon, South Division, Hojai be directed to hear both the petitioners and the respondent nos. 6 to 8 in connection with the representation filed by the petitioners so as to determine the entitlement of the parties to possession of respect of the land measuring 12 bigha covered by Dag no. 175, which is located under Kaki range within Rampur forest village, claimed by the petitioners to be allotted in the name of Sew Saran Mahili (since deceased), who is projected to be the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners.

¶32

In order to facilitate the said hearing, it is provided that the recording of the said land in the names of private respondent nos. 5 to 8 shall not stand as a bar for the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon, South Division, Hojai (respondent no.3) to hear the rights and entitlement of the parties by giving opportunity of hearing to both sides and pass necessary orders. We also provide that the adjudicatory order which will be passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon, South Division, Hojai (respondent no.3) would have an overriding effect on and/ or perusal upon the impugned order related of allotment of land in the names of private respondents.

¶33

This exercise shall be done by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon, South Division, Hojai (respondent no.3) within a period of 2(two) months from the date of production of the certified copy of the order. As both sides are duly represented, the petitioners and the private respondent nos. 5 to 8 are directed to appear before the respondent no.3 on 27.05.2024.

¶34

Page No.# 5/5

¶35

It is needless to say that final orders, if any, passed by the authority shall be communicated to the parties.

¶36

Interim order stands extended till the appearance of the parties before the respondent no.3 and/ or 27.05.2024, whichever is earlier.

¶37

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent as indicated above.

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Baneswar Mahili and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baneswar Mahili and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mostafa Alom and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Jalal Uddin and 18 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Suktara Khanam Laskar, Vs the Commissioner and Secretary

Ajit Kumar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Prem Kanta Boruah and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Pankaj Kumar Nath and 15 Ors. Vs the Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 4 Ors.