Dulal Khakhalary Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, BUSINESS PLAN RETAIL NEBPCL, 1ST FLOOR, NEXIA PARK, GMCH ROAD, CHRISTIAN BASTI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM- 5.

¶10

2:THE TERRITORIAL MANAGER (RETAIL)

¶11

GUWAHATI BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED

¶12

1ST FLOOR NEXIA PARK GMCH ROAD CHRISTIAN BASTI GUWAHATI-781005.

¶13

3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER P.O P.S AND DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-783101 4:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER (T) GOALPARA DIVISION P.O AND P.S- GOALPARA

¶14

Page No.# 2/5

¶15

DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101.

¶16

5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

¶17

RANGJULI REVENUE CIRCLE RANGJULI DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783134.

¶18

6:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER

¶19

RANGJULI RANGE RANGJULI DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783134

¶20

For the Applicant(s) : Mr. H. Das, Advocate

¶21

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H.K. Hazarika, Jr. Govt. Advocate

¶22

Mr. I. Borthakur, Standing Counsel Mr. S. Borthakur, Standing Counsel

¶23

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Date : 15.07.2026

¶26

Heard Mr. H. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant. Mr. S. Borthakur, the learned Standing Counsel

¶27

Page No.# 3/5

¶28

appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2; Mr. I. Borthakur, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 6; and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, the learned Junior Government Advocate appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 5.

¶29

This is an application for recall of the order dated 11.06.2026 passed in WP(C) No. 4838/2024 on the ground that the withdrawal of the writ petition would prejudice the applicant in future proceedings.

¶30

This Court has duly perused the accompanying writ petition wherein the applicant claims to be the owner of a plot of land admeasuring 5 Bighas covered by Dag No. 60 of Patta No. 67 situated at Revenue Village Kothakuthi Part-IV under Rangjuli Revenue Circle in the district of Goalpara, Assam. Out of the said land 2 Bighas were leased to one Himadri Das for setting up a retail outlet of the respondent No. 1.

¶31

The grievance of the applicant, for which the writ petition was filed, pertains to the issuance of a notice dated 27.08.2024 by the Forest Department. It was the specific case of the applicant that the land in question is a patta land and, therefore, the forest officials had no jurisdiction to issue the said notice.

¶32

Page No.# 4/5

¶33

Be that as it may, prior to the interim order passed by this Court on 23.09.2024, the applicant had already been evicted by the Forest Department on the basis of the notice dated 27.08.2024.

¶34

Under such circumstances, the remedy available to the applicant lies before the competent Civil Court for seeking an appropriate declaration of his right, title and interest over his plot of land, along with consequential relief for recovery of possession.

¶35

This Court duly takes note of that while the learned counsel for the applicant had submitted before this Court on 11.06.2026 that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedy under law, there was no mention that such withdrawal should not prejudice the applicant in subsequent proceedings inasmuch as without such observation, the applicant may be prejudiced in subsequent proceedings.

¶36

Accordingly, the instant application stands disposed of by observing that the withdrawal of the accompanying writ petition by the applicant, with liberty to avail such remedies as may be permissible under law, shall not prejudice the applicant. It is further observed that, in the circumstance the applicant, if

¶37

Page No.# 5/5

¶38

advised, approaches the competent Court of Civil jurisdiction, the withdrawal of the writ petition shall not prejudice the applicant in such proceedings.

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

Comparing Assistant

Dulal Khakhalary v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dulal Khakhalary v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

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

R.S.R Fashion Enterprise Vs Induslnd Bank and 3 Ors.

Jaidur Rahman and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

The Management of Bata India Ltd. Vs Hridayananda Phukan and Anr.

Samia Khatun Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hakim Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Monjula Mahanta and 4 Ors. Vs Rajesh Prasad and Ors.