Disposed

Nabadwip Shil and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC16 Sept 2024WP(C)/3579/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition challenging the modification of a Municipal shop allotment to include a cousin. The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioners to submit fresh representation to the Town Committee for a speaking order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to file fresh representation before respondent Nos. 3 & 4 for a speaking order within three months.

Nabadwip Shil and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010118862019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3579/2019

¶5

NABADWIP SHIL AND ANR.

¶6

S/O- LATE JATINDRA KUMAR SHIL, R/O- VILL- SHIL BASTI, COLLEGE ROAD, LANKA MB AREA, P.O AND P.S- LANKA, WARD NO.7, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782446

¶7

2: GITA RANI KAR D/O- LATE JATINDRA KUMAR SHIL R/O- VILL- SHIL BASTI COLLEGE ROAD LANKA MB AREA P.O AND P.S- LANKA WARD NO.7 DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 78244

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶10

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06

¶11

2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HOJAI DIST- HOJAI ASSAM

¶12

3:LANKA TOWN COMMITTEE REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN LANKA TOWN COMMITTEE NEAR BIJOYA GHAT SHILLONG ROAD DIST- HOJAI ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

4:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER LANKA TOWN COMMITTEE NEAR BIJOYA GHAT SHILLONG ROAD DIST- HOJAI ASSAM

¶15

5:DHIRENDRA KUMAR SHIL @ MANTU SHIL S/O- LATE NAGENDRA KR SHIL R/O- LANKA TOWN P.O AND P.S- LANKA WARD NO.7 DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 78244

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R J SAIKIA, MR. L N DIHINGIA,MR. A K SAHU

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. K GOGOI,MR. S ISLAM (r-3),MR. A K TALUKDAR (r-3),S. I. KHAN (r-3),MR. A B T HAQUE,MR. J M A CHOUDHURY

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 17.09.2024

¶21

Heard Mr. S Borthakur learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. K Gogoi learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4, Mr. A.K. Talukdar learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Mr. J.M.A Choudhury learned counsel for respondent No.5.

¶22

The grievance raised by the petitioners is to the effect that the petitioners predecessor in interest was an allotee of a Municipal shop, Shop No.17 in Block (1) B at Lanka Daily Bazar under Lanka Town Committee. It is alleged by the petitioners that after death of their father, behind their backs, the allotment was modified and the

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

name of the respondent No.5 was incorporated as allotee along with the petitioner No.1.

¶25

It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent No.5 is their cousin and taking advantage of being a permanent employee of Lanka Town Committee and claiming to be legal heirs of the original allotee (deceased father of the petitioners), he got his name incorporated.

¶26

It is also the allegation of the petitioner that there was no joint application inasmuch as his signature was forged and in this regard already an FIR has been lodged.

¶27

On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent No.5 that his name was incorporated as allottee in terms of a joint application made by the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.5 and such material fact has been withdrawn and therefore, there is no illegality in such allotment.

¶28

Mr. Gogoi learned counsel in his usual fairness submits that he has obtained instructions that the respondent No.5 was an Assistant Tax Daroga under the Town Committee and the petitioner No.1 was a daily wage earner under the Lanka Town Committee.

¶29

It is the prayer of the petitioners that they have already raised the issue before the Lanka Town Committee and therefore the matter may be relegated to the authority to decide as regards the entitlement of the petitioners as well as of the respondent No.5 of being an allotee of the shop in view of the death of the original allottee.

¶30

Page No.# 4/5

¶31

Mr. Gogoi learned counsel has also submitted that since some disputes are there between the contesting parties, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall be the best authority to decide the issue and therefore, the matter may be relegated to the same. Learned counsel appearing for the Lanka Town Committee submits that the respondent Nos.3 and 4 may be allowed to review the issue and to look into under what circumstances the name of the respondent No.5 was incorporated as joint allotee of the shop.

¶32

The learned counsel for the respondent No.5 has also not objected to such prayer.

¶33

Accordingly the writ petition stands disposed of by permitting the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the respondent Nos.3 & 4 raising their claims including their prayer for cancelation of name of respondent No.5 as allottee of the shop in question.

¶34

On such application being filed, the respondent Nos.3 & 4 shall consider such representation and pass a speaking order in terms of extant Services Rules of Municipal Employees and the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, more particularly as regards the entitlement of allotment in terms of inheritance on the death of original allottee.

¶35

While making such decision a reasonable opportunity of hearing shall also be given to the respondent No.5 as he has also asserted his rights.

¶36

The entire exercise be carried out within a period of three

¶37

Page No.# 5/5

¶38

months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioner.

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

Comparing Assistant

Nabadwip Shil and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nabadwip Shil and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 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

Billal Ali @ Safar Ali Vs the State of Assam

Smti. Shanti Lata Nath @ Shanti Nath and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Bikash Bucha Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Sarawgi Petroleum Agency and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Abdul Audut Sarker @ Audut Sarker Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Manowar Hussain Saikia Vs Md. Nabi Hussain and 3 Ors.