Jumar Ali and Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jumar Ali and Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent no. 2 (District Commissioner, Dhubri) to take on board the petitioners' representations annexed as Annexure-13 to 24 to the writ petition and, after consideration, dispose of them in accordance with law, expeditiously, as the matter involves a project of public importance; interim direction that, till each individual representation is disposed of by a speaking order, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners (operative only if the representations have not meanwhile been disposed of).

Issue for consideration

Whether the representations submitted by the petitioners in response to the acquisition/requisition notices under the 1964 Act had been considered by respondent no. 2 and, if not, whether directions should issue for their consideration and disposal in accordance with law. +1 more

Court's answer

On the consensus of counsel, the writ petition can be disposed of without dealing with the inter-se merits of the contentions of the parties by directing the District Commissioner, Dhubri (respondent no. 2) to take on board the representations of the petitioners annexed as Annexure-13 to 24 and, after consideration, to dispose of them in accordance with law, expeditiously, as the matter involves a project of public importance.

Ratio / Principle

To balance the equities, till such disposal of each individual representation is done by a speaking order, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners; this direction is operative only if the representations have not in the meantime been disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, WP(C)/6342/2025, order dated 12-11-2025 (Manish Choudhury, J.) - Jumar Ali and 12 co-petitioners, residents of Vill. Charua Bakra Jungle Block, Chapar, Dist. Dhubri, aggrieved by a land acquisition proceeding initiated vide L.A. Case no. 2/2025-26 under the Assam Land [Requisition and Acquisition] Act, 1964, having been served with Notices/Orders purportedly under Section 2 of the 1964 Act on different dates of July, 2025, complained that their individual representations against the notices remained unconsidered by the authorities. With the broad consensus of both sides (including the Government contention that notices under Section 3 or in Form A caused no violation of the 1964 Act), the Court disposed of the petition without entering the inter-se merits, directing the District Commissioner and Collector, Dhubri (respondent no. 2) to take on board the representations (Annexure-13 to 24) and, after consideration, dispose of them in accordance with law, expeditiously, as the matter involves a project of public importance. As an equity measure, till each individual representation is disposed of by a speaking order, no coercive action is to be taken against the petitioners, the direction operating only if the representations have not meanwhile been disposed of.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010233942025

2025:GAU-AS:15290

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

Case No. : WP(C)/6342/2025

JUMAR ALI AND ORS

S/O ABDUL GONI R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

2: MOHIRUDDIN SK

S/O FAJAR ALI R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

3: SALMINA EASMIN

W/O MAINUR ISLAM R/O VILL MAHISH BATHAN PO SALKOCHA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

4: RAJBHANU BIBI

D/O AJAM ALI W/O GIYAS UDDIN R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

5: ASIA BIBI

D/O MAZID ALI W/O NURUDDIN R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

6: MASIRAN BIBI

D/O LT FAJAR ALI R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

7: CHAND MIYA SHEIKH

S/O AJIBOR RAHMAN R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

8: SUJAL HOQUE

S/O AJAHAR R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

9: SUNEKA BIBI

D/O LT ARDUSH ALI MONDAL R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK

Page No.# 2/4

PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

10: MOKSED ALI

S/O ABUL KASHEM R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

11: AMAN ALI

S/O LT ALIMUDDIN SHEIKH R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

12: ASAD ALI

S/O MUJAHAR ALI R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM

13: KOMAR ALI

S/O LT MASAR ALI R/O VILL CHARUA BAKRA JUNGLE BLOCK PO CHAPOR DIST DHUBRI ASSA

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

REP BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6

2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND COLLECTOR OF DHUBRI DHUBRI PO DHUBRI PIN 78330

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A SHEIKH, MS F INTAZ

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

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

ORDER

Date : 12-11-2025

Heard Mr. M.A. Sheikh, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department for the respondent no. 1; and Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 2.

Page No.# 3/4

The petitioners, 13 in nos., have joined together to institute the present writ petition stating that they have a common cause of action. The petitioners have claimed that they are owners and in possession of different parcels of land which have been brought under the purview of an acquisition process initiated vide L.A. Case no. 2/2025-26. The petitioners are aggrieved by the land acquisition proceeding so initiated under the Assam Land [Requisition and Acquisition] Act, 1964 [‘the 1964 Act’, for short]. All the petitioners have been served with a Notice and Order issued under the hand of the respondent no. 2 purportedly in exercise of powers under Section 2 of the 1964 Act on different dates of July, 2025. In the notices served upon the petitioners, the areas and descriptions of the parcels of land which are sought to be acquired are mentioned. The petitioners have submitted that in response to the notices, they had already submitted their representations individually on various dates wherein they have raised a common grievance that in case their lands are acquired/requisitioned, they would have no other place to go. It is the common grievance of the petitioners that despite submission of the replies, the respondent authorities have not yet given consideration to those representations.

Mr. Sheikh, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that this writ petition can be disposed of in a similar manner like W.P.[C] no. 5141/2025, which was a writ petition preferred by persons similarly circumstanced.

Both Ms. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and Ms. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam have submitted that if such representations, stated to have been submitted by the petitioners in response to the notices, are not yet been

Page No.# 4/4

given consideration by the respondent no. 2 before whom such representations are filed, a direction may be given for consideration and disposal of the representations in accordance with law. At the same time, they have made a contention that there is no violation of the provisions of the 1964 Act in issuing notices under Section 3 or in Form A.

In view of the broad consensus arrived at by the learned counsel for the parties in the afore-stated manner, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of without dealing into the inter-se merits of the contention of the parties if the representations stated to have been filed against the impugned notices have not yet been considered and disposed of, by directing the District Commissioner, Dhubri [respondent no. 2] to take on board the representations of the petitioners, which are annexed as Annexure-13 to 24 to the writ petition, and after consideration, to dispose of the same in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly. The consideration and disposal of the representations are to be made expeditiously as it involves a project of public importance.

To balance the equities, it is provided that till such disposal of the individual representation is done by a speaking order each, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners. This aforesaid direction would be operative only if in the meantime, the representations have not been disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant