Dismissed

Santosh Kumar Das and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC19 Jun 2025WP(C)/3427/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Co-pattadars challenged a land demarcation order under 2nd RS Pattas via writ petition alleging it was passed without notice. The High Court held the subject matter civil in nature involving disputed questions of fact and dismissed the petition with liberty to approach the Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to approach the appropriate Civil Court.

Santosh Kumar Das and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010127132025

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3427/2025

¶6

SANTOSH KUMAR DAS AND 2 ORS. S/O- LATE MAHENDRA CHANDRA DAS, R/O- BUDHURAIL, AMBICAPUR PART-4, SILCHAR, PIN- 788005, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

¶7

2: AJU DAS S/O- LATE MAHENDRA DAS R/O- AMBICAPUR PART-4 SILCHAR PIN- 788005 DIST. CACHAR ASSAM 3: SAJAL DAS S/O- LATE MAHENDRA DAS R/O- AMBICAPUR PART-4 SILCHAR PIN- 788005 DIST. CACHAR ASSA VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

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

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEY ASSAM RAJBHAWAN RUPNAGAR PIN- 781032 ASSAM

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR SILCHAR PIN- 788001. 4:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER SILCHAR CACHAR PIN- 788001. 5:THE ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER SILCHAR SADAR CIRCLE SILCHAR CACHAR PIN- 788001. 6:MINTU BHUSAN DAS S/O- LATE MANI DAS R/O- AMBICAPUR PART-IV (BUDHURAIL) P.O. KATHAL P.S. SILCHAR PIN- 788005 DIST. CACHAR ASSA

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P CHOUDHURY, MS B DEVI,MR K BISWAKARMA

¶14

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

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶17

ORDER

¶18

20.06.2025

¶19

Heard Shri S.P. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners, who have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer:

¶20

“In the premises aforesaid it is prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased

¶21

Page No.# 3/4

¶22

to admit this petition, call for records, issue Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction be not issued directing the respondents more particularly respondent No.5to recall or forbear from giving effect to the order dated 22.05.2025 whereinthere being a direction to the petitioners to present at the site of the land covered by 2^nd RS Patta No. 99,104,105 situated at Vill-Barakpur, Mouza Ambicapur Part- IV, Silchar, Cachar for demarcationand/or a writ in the nature of certiorari be not issued thereby directing the respondents to set aside and quash the order dated 22.05.2025and/or may pass such further or other orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

¶23

And

¶24

During pendency of the instant writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an interim order thereby directing the respondent No.5 not to proceed with the demarcation of the land covered by 2^nd RS Patta No. 99, 104, 105 situated at Vill-Barakpur, Mouza -Ambicapur Part- IV, Silchar, Cacharpursuant to the order dated 22.05.2025 till the final disposal of the case.

¶25

And the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray.

¶26

It is the contention of the petitioners that they and the respondent no. 6 are the co-pattadars of the plot of land which is asmali in nature. However, without issuing any prior notice, the demarcation order has been issued on 22.05.2025 which is against the principles of law.

¶27

On the other hand, both Shri S.S. Roy, learned State Counsel and Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department have raised the issue of maintainability by submitting that apart from the dispute being private in

¶28

Page No.# 4/4

¶29

nature, the same would come within the ambit of a civil dispute which has to be raised in the appropriate Civil Court.

¶30

Shri Choudhury, the learned counsel has submitted that the demarcation order has been issued without notice and there is violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶31

In the opinion of this Court, the subject matter is civil in nature wherein disputed question of fact are involved. The aspect of alleged violation of the principles of natural justice can definitely be one of the grounds which may be taken up by the petitioners in the Civil Court.

¶32

In view of the aforesaid discussions, the instant writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Civil Court.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Santosh Kumar Das and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Das and 2 Ors. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdur Rofique Vs the Union of India

Diganta Sarma Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Wahida Rehman Vs National Highway Authority of India and 4 Ors.

Smti Damayanti Saikia Baruah Vs the State of Assam

Smti Damayanti Saikia Baruah Vs the State of Assam

Chintamoni Mahanta Vs the State of Assam