Smti Sati Kar Vs the State of Assam

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC010050752025

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:4473

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/1378/2025

¶6

SMTI SATI KAR W/O. LATE PURNENDU KAR, DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF LATE PARESH CHANDRA KAR, R/O VILLAGE RADMANAGAR BILLPAR, SILCHAR, CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788001

¶7

2: SRI PUSPENDU KAR S/O. LATE PURNENDU KAR GRAND SON OF LATE PARESH CHANDRA KAR RIO. VILLAGE RADMANAGAR BILL PAR SILCHAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM PIN CODE 788001

¶8

3: PRADIP KAR S/O. LATE PROTUL KAR R/O. FLAT NO. G309-6 NBCC TOWER RAJARHAT TOWN DISTRICT- 14 NORTH PARGANAS WEST BENGAL PIN CODE 700156

¶9

4: PRONOB KAR S/O. LATE PROTUL KAR RIO. SILCHAR TOWN WARD NO. 7 P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM.

¶10

5: PRONOY KAR S/O. LATE PROTUL KAR R/O. SILCHAR TOWN WARD NO. 7 P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR

¶11

Page No.# 2/8

¶12

DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM

¶13

6: SUJIT KUMAR KAR S/O. LATE SUNIL KUMAR KAR RIO. SILCHAR TOWN WARD NO. 9 P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM.

¶14

7: SUMITRA DEB ROY D/O. SUNIL KUMAR KAR R/O. BAHADURPUR RAMKRISHNA NAGAR BLOCK - 1 P.S. NILAM BAZAR DISTRICT KARIMGANJ ASSAM

¶15

8: SHYAMALI KAR D/O. SUNIL KUMAR KAR RIO. SILCHAR PADMANAGAR BILPAR WARD NO. 9 DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM

¶16

9: SUBHASH CHANDRA KAR S/O. LATE KHIROD RANJAN KAR RIO. KANAKPUR PART - 1 P.S. SADAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSA

¶17

VERSUS

¶18

THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶19

THE SECRETARY, TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI - 781006

¶20

2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SRIBHUMI P.O. KARIMGANJ DISTRICT SRIBHUMI ASSAM. PIN CODE 788710

¶21

3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER RAMKRISHNA NAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE VILLAGE AND P.O. RAMKRISHNA NAGAR

¶22

Page No.# 3/8

¶23

DISTRICT-SRIBHUMI ASSAM. PIN CODE 788166

¶24

4:PARITOSH KAR S/O. LATE PORESH CHANDRA KAR R/O. KRIPASINDHU MANSION OPPOSITE NIGHTANGLE HOSPITAL FLAT NO. K.M.-II PACHGORI ROAD P.S. RANGIRKHARI SILCHAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM. PIN CODE 788012 5:SMTI JAYANTI DEB D/O. LATE PORESH CHANDRA KAR R/O. LINK ROAD LANE NO. I/B HOUSE NO. 62/A 2ND FLOOR P.S RANGIRKHARI SILCHAR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78800

¶25

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. J GHOSH, MR. JUNM LASKAR,MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY

¶26

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM

¶27

BEFORE

¶28

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶29

ORDER

¶30

09.04.2025

¶31

Heard Mr. P. K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department for the respondent No. 1, and Mr. S. Baruah, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam representing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶32

The petitioners claim to be the pattaholders of the following land along with

¶33

Page No.# 4/8

¶34

the respondent Nos. 4 and 5:

¶35

a. Land measuring (1) 1 Bigha 16 Katha, 14 Lessa, (2) 1 Bigha, 12 Katha 1 Lessa, covered by Dag No. 324, 326 Patta No. 101 (new) situated at village Ramkrishna Nagar Part-I, Lot No. 11, Mouza: Agerosuti, Revenue Circle- Ramkrishna Nagar,

¶36

b. Land measuring 3 Bigha, 8 Lessa and 13 Katha, 15 Lessa covered by Dag No. 305, 323 of KP Patta No. 111 (New) of Village Ramkrishna Nagar Town Part-III, Lot No. 11, Mouza: Agerosuti, Revenue CircleRamkrishna Nagar.

¶37

c. Land measuring (1) 15 Katha 12 Lessa, (2) 12 Katha 2 Lessa, (3) 8 Katha 8 Lessa and (4) 1 Bigha 1 Katha 3 Lessa covered by Dag No. 329, 333, 344, 93 of KP Patta No. 106 (New) situated at Village Ramkrishna Nagar Town Part-III, Lot No. 11, Mouza: Agerosuti, Revenue Circle- Ramkrishna Nagar.

¶38

d. Land measuring (1) 6 Katha 6 Lessa, (2) 6 Katha 1 Less covered by Dag No. 304, 321 of KP Patta No. 110 (New) situated at Ramkrishna Nagar Part- III, Lot No. 11, Mouza: Agerosuti, Revenue CircleRamkrishna Nagar.

¶39

e. Land measuring (1) 5 Bigha 19 Katha 13 Lessa, (2) 3 Bigha 9 Katha 0 Less, (3) 1 bigha 16 Katha 15 Lessa, covered by Dag No. 51, 513, 514 of K.P. Patta No. 193 (new) situated at Village Kalinagar Part-IV, Mouza-Agerosuti, Lot No. 10.

¶40

It is the case of the petitioners that wife of the petitioner No. 9 is suffering for cancer and for want of money, the petitioner No. 9 wants to sale some share of his land for better and further treatment of his wife. Accordingly, an application

¶41

Page No.# 5/8

¶42

was filed for partition and mutation of the share of the petitioners in their names, however, even after filing of such application, nothing has been done in this regard.

¶43

The State Legislature has enacted an act, ‘the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 (Assam Act no. IX of 2012)’ the Preamble of which states that it is an Act to provide for the delivery of the notified public services to the people of the State of Assam within the stipulated time limit and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. The State Legislature has made certain amendments in the provisions of ‘the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012’ by ‘the Assam Right to Public Services [Amendment] Act, 2019 (Assam Act no. VII of 2019)’ (‘the ARTPS (Amendment) Act’, for short). In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 of the ARTPS Act, the State Government has also made a set of rules viz. the Assam Right to Public Services Rules, 2012 [‘the ARTPS Rules’, for short].

¶44

The State Government, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 4 of the ARTPS Act has declared that the ARTPS Act has come into effect to the whole State except in the districts of Kokrajhar, Chirang, Baksa, Udalguri, Karbi Anglong and Dima Hasao.

¶45

As per Section 2[h], ‘Right to Public Service’ means the right to obtain the notified service under the ARTPS Act from time to time within the stipulated time limit as prescribed under Section 5. ‘Notified service’, as per Section 2(i), means any service notified by the State Government under Section-4. Section 2(k) has provided for the ‘stipulated time limit’ which means the maximum time to provide the service the service by the Designated Public Servant or to decide the appeals by the appellate authorities as notified under Section 4.

¶46

The Designated Public Servant on receipt of an application to provide a notified

¶47

Page No.# 6/8

¶48

service shall either provide the notified service or reject the application and in case of rejection of an application, he shall have to record the reasons in writing and communicate to the person making the application (i) the reasons for such rejection; (ii) the period within which an appeal against such rejection may be preferred; and (iii) the particulars of the Appellate Authority.

¶49

Section 8 has made provisions for appeal as well as for second appeal before an Appellate Authority and the Assam State Commission for Right to Public Services [‘the Commission’, for short] respectively, within the time limits provided therefor.

¶50

By a notification no. AR.39/2017/149 dated 04.03.2020 of the Administrative Reforms and Training Department, Government of Assam, it has been notified that the Assam Administrative Tribunal shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Assam State Commission for Right to Public Services until further order and the said notification has come into force with immediate effect.

¶51

Section 14 of the ARTPS Act has given overriding effect to the Act. As per the said Section, in relation to the notified services under the ARTPS Act and its implementation, the provisions of the ARTPS Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than the said Act.

¶52

The State Government has, in the meantime, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 4 of the ARTPS Act, notified and brought a number of services under the purview of the ARTPS Act by a notification no. AR.69/2011/PtII/96 dated 10.04.2013. Amongst the services so notified and brought under the purview of the ARTPS Act includes ‘demarcation’.

¶53

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Whirpool Corporation v. Registrar

¶54

Page No.# 7/8

¶55

of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others , reported in [1998] 8 SCC 1 , has further observed as under :-

¶56

“14. The power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution is plenary in nature and is not limited by any other provision of the Constitution. This power can be exercised by the High Court not only for issuing writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights contained in Part III of the Constitution but also for “any other purpose”.

¶57

Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court, having regard to the facts of the case, has a direction to entertain or not to entertain a writ petition. But the High Court has imposed upon itself certain restrictions one of which is that if an effective and efficacious remedy is available, the High Court would not normally exercise its jurisdiction. But the alternative remedy has been consistently held by this Court not to operate as a bar in at least three contingencies, namely, where the writ petition has been filed for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights or where there has been a violation of the principle of natural justice or where the order or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged.”

¶58

In the light of the above discussion as regards exercise of the extra-ordinary and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court on analysis of the provisions of the alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioner, is of the considered view that such remedy is an efficacious and adequate one. From the aforesaid discussions, it is also clear that the petitioner is having efficacious remedy under Sections 9(2)(a) and Section 8(3)(4) of the ARTPS Act. The petitioner is also having efficacious remedy against such alleged delay inasmuch as the appellate authority can even imposed penalty, if the public service is not provided within the time stipulated within the Act.

¶59

Page No.# 8/8

¶60

In such view of the matter, this Court finds that this writ petition is not to be entertained as it is open to the petitioner to have recourse to the remedy under the ARTPS Act.

¶61

Accordingly, the petitioners are granted liberty to file fresh application in terms of the aforesaid Act, 2012 which is required to be filed online and filing of such application, the concerned designated officer shall consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the aforesaid Act, 2012 and take a decision within the time stipulated in terms of the aforesaid Act, 2012.

¶62

This writ petition stands disposed of.

¶63

Comparing Assistant

Smti Sati Kar v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti Sati Kar v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunmai Phukan and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mujahar Ali Sarkar Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

The Union of India and 2 Ors. Vs Natwar Kumar Jalan

On the Death of Smt Arpana Sarkar Her Legal Heir Noel Rongpi Vs the State of Assam and 5 Others

Mohit Agarwal Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Smt. Urmila Agarwala Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.