Dilbar Ali Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT (L.R.) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT (L.R.) DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶11

3:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-32

¶12

4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA P.O. AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BARPETA REVENUE CIRCLE MANDIA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

PIN-781308

¶15

6:KISMAT ALI S/O HABIBUR RAHMAN R/O VILL AND P.O.- RADHAKUCHI DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 78130

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H SAIKIA, MR. B BORAH,MS L HMAR,MR K KASHYAB,MR. F A HASSAN,MR. K KALITA,A PATHAK

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT, GA, ASSAM

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

09.03.2026

¶21

Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharyaa, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate for the State respondent and Ms. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶22

2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner praying for setting aside and quashing of the order dated 16.02.2026 passed by the Director of Land Records and Surveys, Assam in its capacity as the appellate authority in an appeal preferred against the appointment of the petitioner by the private respondent No. 6. The further prayer of the writ petitioner is that against the said order a review petition has been filed in terms of Executive Instructions 162-D. The review petition was filed on 24.02.2026 and the matter is presently pending before the authority exercising the review jurisdiction, Additional Chief

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

Secretary, Government of Assam, Revenue and Disaster Management.

¶25

3. The petitioner before this Court does not dispute that the question which has been urged before the Court seeking direction in terms of sub-paragraph No. i of paragraph No. 17 of the prayers, which is presently pending before the review authority. The present writ petition was filed on 05.03.2026 and prior to that on 24.02.2026 the review petition has been filed before the review authority. The further prayer of the writ petitioner is that, till disposal of the review petition, there should be an interim direction by the Court to the respondent authority, namely the District Commissioner, Barpeta not to appoint the review petitioner as Gaon Pradhan in terms of the selection and/or to restrain the District Commissioner, Barpeta from acting upon the directions contained in the order dated 16.02.2026 passed by the appellate authority, namely the Director of Land Records & Surveys, Assam, directing the District Commissioner, Barpeta to re-evaluate the candidates and award appropriate marks to the respondent No.6 in the preferential category and to issue fresh select list. It is the further claim of the petitioner that the District Commissioner, Barpeta be restrained from acting in terms of these directions till the review petition filed by the petitioner is finally decided by the review authorities.

¶26

4. The learned Government Counsel as well as the learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management submits that the review petition was preferred on 24.02.2026 and the review authority is presently in sesin of the matter.

¶27

5. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties,

¶28

Page No.# 4/5

¶29

it is seen that the issue which the petitioner is pressing before this Court in the present proceedings is the issue which is also pending before the review authorities. The power to exercise review is specified under Executive Instructions 162-D of the Executive Instructions appended to the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886. Pursuant to the amendments brought in, it is the Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, who is presently assigned with the authority to review any order passed by the appellate authority against which any such review is filed by the aggrieved party. There is a clear averment in the writ petition that the review petition was filed on 24.02.2026. The same issue is again urged in the present proceedings in this writ petition which was filed on 05.03.2026. It is a trite law that a litigant shall not pursue the same remedy simultaneously before more than one forum at the same time.

¶30

6. It is clear to this Court that the petitioner has already approached the review authorities by filing review petition dated 24.02.2026 and the review authority is in sesin of the matter. Under such circumstances, it would not be appropriate for this Court to excise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in respect of the prayers made, more particularly in subparagraph No. i of paragraph No. 17 to decide on an issue as to whether the orders passed by the appellate authority calls for an interference. Consequently, there would be no occasion for the Court to pass any interim orders as sought for during the pendency of the review. However, this Court is of the view that since the review petition is pending, the same needs to be expeditiously disposed of and therefore, without expressing anything on merit at this stage and without issuing notice, this review petition stands disposed of with a

¶31

Page No.# 5/5

¶32

direction to the review authority namely the Addl. Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue and Disaster Management, Dispur to examine the claims of the review petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a timebound manner as expeditiously as possible within a period of 30 days from the date of passing this order.

¶33

7. In terms of the above this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Dilbar Ali v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilbar Ali v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjumala Devi Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Alok Shankar Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sri Bhupen Kakati and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Paresh Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sri Akhil Kumar Sarma Id NO19852607 Vs the State of Assam Ors.

Pampa Das Vs Punjab National Bank