Allowed¶44

Raghunath Haloi and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Feb 2025WP(C)/6838/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Eviction; proposed eviction restrained; Patta land; Pattadar; tenant; Dag No. 508; Nalbari Municipal Board; Chief Executive Officer; Assam Diploma Engineers Service Association; Nalbari, Assam; writ petition allowed; Gauhati High Court; Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair; 05.02.2025; 2025:GAU-AS:1207.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; respondent nos. 5 & 6 restrained from taking any steps to evict the petitioners from the plot of land. ¶44

Raghunath Haloi and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010217482022

2025:GAU-AS:1207

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/6838/2022

¶6

RAGHUNATH HALOI AND 2 ORS S/O- SRI MAHENDRA HALOI, R/O- VILL- KHATKATARA, P.S.- BORKHANAJAN, DIST.- NALBARI, PIN- 781337, ASSAM.

¶7

2: BIPUL KUMAR BARUAH S/O- SRI JOGEN BARUAH

¶8

R/O- VILL.- KATLABORKUCHI

¶9

P.O.- MILANPUR DIST.- NALBARI

¶10

PIN- 781337 ASSAM.

¶11

3: DIPAK KALITA S/O- LATE KALICHARAN KALITA R/O- VILL. SONDHA

¶12

P.O.- SONDHA

¶13

DIST.- NALBARI PIN- 781337 ASSAM VERSUS

¶14

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-06.

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

2:THE CIRCLE OFFICER NALBARI REVENUE CIRCLE DIST.- NALBARI PIN- 781337 ASSAM.

¶18

3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶19

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

¶20

DISPUR GHY-06. 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NALBARI O/O. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NALBARI PIN- 781337 ASSAM.

¶21

5:THE NALBARI MUNICIPAL BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶22

NALBARI MUNICIPAL BOARD

¶23

PIN- 781337 ASSAM.

¶24

6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶25

NALBARI MUNICIPAL BOARD

¶26

O/O THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER NALBARI MUNICIPAL BOARD

¶27

PIN- 781337 ASSAM.

¶28

7:ASSAM DIPLOMA ENGINEERS SERVICE ASSOCIATION REP. BY ITS ZONAL SECRETARY NALBARI (PHE) CIRCLE NALBARI- 781337 ASSAM

¶29

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI, MR. N BARMAN

¶30

Page No.# 3/4

¶31

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, MR. A KAKATI (R- 5,6),MR. J ISLAM(R- 5,6),MR. A S ALI(R- 5,6),MR. S A B KHABIR(R- 5,6),SC, PWD,GA, ASSAM

¶32

BEFORE

¶33

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶34

ORDER

¶35

Date : 05.02.2025

¶36

Heard Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department appearing for the respondent no. 1 and Ms. N. Barman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent no. 2 & 4; Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, appearing for the respondent no. 3 as well as Mr. S. A. B. Khabir, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 5 & 6.

¶37

The petitioners, in the present proceeding, has raised a grievance with regard to the action taken by the respondent nos. 5 & 6 in proposing to evict them from the land under their possession.

¶38

It is the contention of the petitioners that the land presently occupied by them was allotted to the respondent no. 7 association and accordingly, they are running their shops in the said plot of land as tenants of the respondent no. 7.

¶39

Ms. N. Barman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 2 & 4, on instructions, submits that as per the record maintained, the land in question, covered by Dag No. 508 was allotted to the Assam Diploma Engineers Service Association (respondent no. 7). The said position is not disputed to by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5 & 6.

¶40

In view of the above position, the land not being the land so allotted to the Municipal Corporation and the same being a Patta land; and the petitioners herein,

¶41

Page No.# 4/4

¶42

being the tenants of the Pattadar i.e. the respondent no. 7, the impugned action on the part of the respondent no. 5 & 6 in seeking to evict the petitioners from the said plot of land would not be sustainable. Accordingly, it is directed that in view of the fact that the petitioners are the tenants of respondent no. 7 and the respondent no. 7 being the Pattadar of the land in question, the action on the part of the respondent nos. 5 & 6 in seeking to evict the petitioners from the said plot of land would not be sustainable and accordingly, they are restrained from taking any steps in this connection.

¶43

In the event, the said plot of land is allotted subsequently to the Municipal Board, action as may be called for in the matter, in accordance with law, may be permissible to be taken by it.

¶44

In view of the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands allowed.

¶45

A copy of the instructions received by Ms. N. Barman, learned Government Advocate and furnished to this Court, is kept on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification.

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

Comparing Assistant

Raghunath Haloi and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghunath Haloi and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamali Baro @ Kamali Boro Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sieakte Chorei Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Puspa Ram Borah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Nabajyoti Sarma Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 3 Ors.

Jadab Chandra Nath Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Masaddar Ali Laskar Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.