Hajrat Ali and Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Heard Mr. K. K. Mahanta, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. M. Ali, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. B. J. Talukdar, the learned Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. I have also heard Mrs. P. R. Mahanta, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1.

¶265

Two hundred sixteen (216) writ petitioners have joined together to file the instant writ petition complaining about various notices issued by the Respondent No.6 which have been collectively enclosed to the writ petition as Anenxure-8 (series).

¶266

Page No.# 17/26

¶267

The Petitioners herein claim that they are in possession of various small plots of land at village Doloni Beel, Boitamari Revenue Circle, in the District of Bongaigaon.

¶268

The case of the Petitioners herein is that they owned lands which were eroded by the river Brahmaputra and its tributaries. Thereafter, being poor cultivators, they occupied lands at Doloni Beel under Boitamari Revenue Circle in the District of Bongaigaon about 50 years ago and constructed dwelling houses thereon. The said lands are covered by various dag numbers, which have been duly mentioned in Paragraph No.3 of the writ petition. It is, therefore, the case of the Petitioners that they are not encroachers but are in settled possession of the lands.

¶269

It is also stated at Paragraph No.3 of the writ petition, that a perusal of the 1971 voter list of Village Doloni Beel shows that the Petitioners are descendants of persons who had been occupying land in the said village since 1971 as landless and river-eroded persons. After occupying the lands, they submitted several representations before the District Commissioner, Bongaigaon, seeking allotment of the occupied land in their names in view of their respective possession; however, no action has been taken till date.

¶270

Page No.# 18/26

¶271

Mr. K. K. Mahanta, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that no decision has been taken in respect to all those applications by the Respondent Authorities. It is however pertinent to observe that filing of application seeking settlement prima facie appears that the Petitioners have admitted that these are Government lands.

¶272

The grievance of the Petitioners however is that while their applications seeking settlement are pending, the Respondent Authorities have issued notices on 08.01.2026 under Section 18(3) of the Settlement Rules to the Petitioners. These notices as already stated above have been collectively enclosed as Annexure-8 (series) to the writ petition.

¶273

The learned Senior counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Respondent No.6 by way of these notices dated 08.01.2026 have directed the Petitioners to demolish their houses/structures, remove all encroachments and vacate the lands on or before 23.01.2026 without carrying out any adjudication as regards the rights of the Petitioners qua the lands under their possession. The learned Senior counsel further submitted that on one hand, the Petitioners have been asked to vacate within 15 days i.e. on or before 23.01.2026 and on the other hand, the Petitioners have

¶274

Page No.# 19/26

¶275

been also asked that if they have any claim or objection regarding their rights over the said lands, they need to submit the same along with relevant supporting documents to the Office of the Respondent No.6 on or before 23.01.2026 which means that even if any representation is submitted, it would not be a meaningful exercise. He therefore submitted that this is a fit case where the impugned notices are required to set aside and quashed. In addition to that, the learned Senior counsel submitted that all the said notices have been received one day prior to the date fixed for vacation.

¶276

Per contra, Mrs. P. R. Mahanta, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue Department submitted that the lands in question being Government lands, no person has rights to remain in occupation of such land unless allotted and settled as per the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 read with the Settlement Rules. He further submitted that instead of setting aside these notices, the notices be construed as Show Cause Notices upon the Petitioners and a period of 15 days can be granted to the Petitioners from today for submitting their respective representation(s) along with necessary evidence to substantiate their claims to remain over the said land under their occupation. He further submitted that on the basis of

¶277

Page No.# 20/26

¶278

the respective representation so submitted by each Petitioner along with the documents, the District Commissioner, Bongaigaon or the Co-District Commissioner can be directed to look into such representations and thereupon pass Speaking Orders.

¶279

I have also heard Mr. B. J. Talukdar, the learned Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 who also supports the submission of Mrs. P. R. Mahanta, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue Department.

¶280

This Court has heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and has given anxious consideration to their respective submissions.

¶281

The materials on record have been duly taken note of.

¶282

A perusal of the provisions of Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 as well as the Settlement Rules clearly show that no person can remain in occupation of Government land without permission or allotment granted by the competent authority.

¶283

This Court also finds it pertinent to observe that the Assam Land Policy, 2019 confers certain rights upon those persons who

¶284

Page No.# 21/26

¶285

are in Government lands to seek settlement. This aspect has been duly taken note of by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of Md. Salak Uddin Vs. State of Assam and Others reported in (2024) SCC Online Gau 921 . It is very pertinent to observe that in the said judgment, the learned Division Bench of this Court observed that no matter what, a notice is required before initiating any procedure for eviction so that the principles of natural justice which forms a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution is not violated.

¶286

This Court now finds it also relevant to take note of the notices which have been issued to the Petitioners. One of such notices which have been enclosed to Annexure-8 (series) is reproduced herein under:

¶287

“ Government of Assam

¶288

Office of The Circle Officer, Boitamari Revenue Circle, Boitamari

¶289

No. BMC-2/2025/Part-1/6 Dated: Boitamari, 08^th January, 2026

NOTICE

To

Hashem Ali,

S/o Late Abdul Kader,

¶294

Dolani Beel

¶295

Page No.# 22/26

¶296

This is to inform you that a public notice was issued on 07.01.2026 directing all encroachers occupying government land under the villages Koreya Pahar, Bhoralkundi Beel, Konara Beel and Dolani Beel within the Boitamari Revenue Circle to vacate the encroached land. Upon enquiry, it has been found that you are illegally occupying government land covered by Dag No.404 of Dolani Beel village. Therefore, you are hereby directed to demolish your house/structures at your own cost, remove all encroachments, and vacate the said land on or before 23/01/2026.

¶297

If you have any claim or objection regarding your right over the said land, you are required to submit the same along with relevant supporting documents to the office of the undersigned on or before 23/01/2026.

¶298

Failing which, action shall be taken to evict the encroachers from the said land at any time after the said date, in accordance with the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886.

¶299

This notice is issued on 08.01.2026 under my hand and seal of the office.

¶300

Sd/- illegible

¶301

Circle Officer Boitamari Revenue Circle

¶302

Boitamari”

¶303

A perusal of the said notice reveals that on one hand, one of the Petitioners have been asked to vacate within 15 days from the date of publication of the notice and on the other hand, the Petitioners have also been asked to submit representation within 15 days i.e. 23.01.2026.

¶304

The contents of the said notices do not inspire the confidence

¶305

Page No.# 23/26

¶306

of this Court taking into consideration that on one hand the Respondent No.6 had asked the Petitioners to vacate the land under their occupation and on the other hand have asked the Petitioners to submit their grievances on or before 23.01.2026. It appears that the manner in which the Respondent No.6 proposes to deal with the matter is too mechanical. Under such circumstances, such course of action cannot be permitted as per the settled principles of law.

¶307

Be that as it may, as the Petitioners admittedly have received notices which have been collectively enclosed as Annexure-8 (series) to the writ petition, it would be in the interest of justice that instead of setting aside the notices, the said notices be construed as Show Cause Notices.

¶308

The Petitioners can be granted the liberty to submit their respective representation treating the said notices as Show Cause Notice and thereby providing the necessary evidences which would show that the Petitioners have a right of settlement over the land in terms with the Assam Land Policy, 2019 as well as also that the Petitioners’ rights over the land have matured by operation of law.

¶309

This Court is also of the opinion that when the Petitioners are

¶310

Page No.# 24/26

¶311

given the opportunity to submit their respective representations along with necessary evidences, an opportunity of personal hearing would also be required to be given to the Petitioners so that they are in a position to explain their case in relation to evidence produced. This Court duly takes note of a recent judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others Vs. State of Assam and Others dated 10.02.2026 wherein the Supreme Court even in respect to reserved forest land directed that pursuant to orders passed, if the decision is not favourable, a further period of 15 days is required to be given so that the aggrieved parties can take recourse to the provisions of law.

¶312

Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:

¶313

(i) The notices which have been issued to the Petitioners enclosed as Annexure-8 (series) to the writ petition shall be treated as Show Cause Notices issued to the Petitioners.

¶314

(ii) The Petitioners having received these notices are given the liberty to submit their respective representations within 20 days from today.

¶315

(iii) This Court further directs that such representations be

¶316

Page No.# 25/26

¶317

submitted to the District Commissioner, Bongaigaon.

¶318

(iv) The District Commissioner, Bongaigaon or the Co-District Commissioner, within whose jurisdiction the lands in question are situated shall decide such representations by affording opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioners who submit representation(s) in pursuance to the instant judgment passed by this Court.

¶319

(v) The District Commissioner, Bongaigaon or Co-District Commissioner shall decide the representations by taking note of the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, the Settlement Rules as well as the Assam Land Policy, 2019 without being influenced by the contents of Paragraph Nos. 1 and 2 of the said notices so issued.

¶320

(vi) It is further observed and directed that District Commissioner, Bongaigaon or the Co-District Commissioner shall pass Speaking Orders against the respective claims made by the Petitioners who submit representations as per the liberty granted above.

¶321

(vii) It is further observed that in the circumstances, the Speaking orders passed are against the claims of the Petitioners who have submitted representations, no steps for eviction be carried out for a period of 15 days from service of such Speaking Orders upon the

¶322

Page No.# 26/26

¶323

Petitioners. In that regard, it shall be open to the District Commissioner, Bongaigaon or the Co-District Commissioner to fix a date for passing the Speaking Order on the date of the personal hearing or such date as per its convenience.

¶324

(viii) It is observed that till the aforesaid exercise is being carried out as directed hereinabove, no steps be taken for eviction of the Petitioners.

¶325

(ix) Interim order passed on 06.02.2026 stands vacated.

¶326

Bijoy Saha

¶327

Digitally signed by Bijoy Saha Date: 2026.02.19 11:02:50 +05'30'

¶328

JUDGE

¶329

Comparing Assistant

Hajrat Ali and Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hajrat Ali and Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ikbal Hussain and Anr. Vs Bikash Saikia and Ors.

Jitendra Nath Sarma Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Abul Ali and 46 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Smti Bhagila Deuri Vs Gyanendra Dev Tripathi, IAS and Anr.

Kaziranga Jatiyo Orchid Aru Joiba Boi Chitra Udyan Samabai Samiti Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Pradip Kalita and 103 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.