Prasanta Baruah Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010104732022

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:9548

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3662/2022

¶6

PRASANTA BARUAH

¶7

S/O- LATE BANESHWAR BARUAH, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, MANGAL BATARI (WEEKLY NEWS PAPER), HOUSE NO. 183, KARIMCHOWK, M.B. ROAD, P.O. AND P.S. MANGALDAI, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM. PIN- 784125.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI781006.

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM P.W.D. DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.

¶11

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG MANGALDAI ASSAM PIN- 784125.

¶12

4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MANGALDAI REVENUE CIRCLE DARRANG ASSAM. PIN- 784125. 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD DEPARTMENT DARRANG

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

MANGALDAI P.O. MANGALDAI PIN- 784125.

¶15

6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MANGALDAI MUNICIPAL BOARD DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 784125

¶16

Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. R Rahman

¶17

Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. J Handique,

¶18

Govt. Advocate, Assam Mr. R Barpujari for respondent No.1

¶19

Mr. M Bhuyan for respondent Nos.2 and 5 Mr. J Handique

¶20

for respondent Nos.2 and 5

¶21

for respondent Nos.3, 4 and 6

¶22

B E F O R E

¶23

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER

¶24

13.07.2026

¶25

Heard Mr. R Rahman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. R Barpujari, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1. Mr. M Bhuyan, the learned counsel, who appears on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 5 and Mr. J Handique, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 6.

¶26

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the

¶27

Page No.# 3/4

¶28

notice dated 12.08.2021 whereby the petitioner has been issued notice along with 86 other persons to vacate the Government land covered by Dag Nos.466,473,524,677.

¶29

It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of a plot of land admeasuring 2 kathas under Dag No.517 of KP Patta No.870 of Mangaldoi Town (Tengabari) in the district of Darrang and as such, the petitioner ought not to have been issued the said notice dated 12.08.2021 inasmuch as, the petitioner is not in possession of the land covered by Dag Nos.466,473,524,677 of Chapai Mouza of Mangaldoi Town (Tengabari).

¶30

This Court has duly taken note of the documents which have been placed on record, wherein the petitioner claims ownership and possession over a plot of land admeasuring 2 kathas covered by Dag No.517 of KP Patta No.870 of Mangaldoi Town (Tengabari) in the district of Darrang. The records reveal that the petitioner’s name is shown in the record of rights over the said plot of land. Under such circumstances, the respondent authorities cannot evict the petitioner from the said patta land of the petitioner. On the other hand, it is also not in dispute that the petitioner claims no right over Dag Nos.466, 473, 524, 677 of Chapai Mouza within Mangaldoi Town.

¶31

Considering the above, this Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition thereby directing the respondent authorities not to evict the petitioner from Dag No.517 of KP Patta No.870 of Mangaldoi Town (Tengabari) in the Darrang district.

¶32

The said directions/observations, however, shall not preclude the respondent authorities to initiate and take steps in respect to the land so mentioned in the notice dated 12.08.2021 in respect to Dag Nos.466, 473, 524,

¶33

Page No.# 4/4

¶34

677 under Chapai Mouza within Mangaldoi Town in the District of Darrang.

¶35

Writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.

¶36

8. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Prasanta Baruah v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanta Baruah 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Bidyut Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Sri Nipam Bezbaruah and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Smti. Bajanti Karmakar Vs Lakhinandan Saharia, Acs

Sunil Mittal Vs Chairperson and Anr.

Ajit Kumar Nath Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Smti Surabala Dey Vs the State of Assam and 11 Ors.