Nur Mahammad Vs the State of Assam — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Nur Mahammad Vs the State of Assam — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of: petitioner may file fresh reply to the Show Cause Notice by 22.01.2026 with documents; timely replies to be considered expeditiously with an opportunity of personal hearing; if the decision goes against him, 15 days to vacate; if no reply is filed, authorities free to proceed in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be afforded an effective opportunity to respond to the eviction/show cause notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the DFO, Nagaon before eviction from the land in his occupation. +1 more

Court's answer

Irrespective of whether any reply was filed earlier, the petitioner is permitted to submit fresh replies against the Show Cause Notice by 22.01.2026 along with documents.

Ratio / Principle

If such replies are filed within the specified time, they are required to be considered expeditiously, giving the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing.

Key takeaways

If no reply is filed within the time specified, the respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶33
In case the consideration goes against the petitioner, a further 15 days' time shall be afforded to him to vacate the land, failing which the authorities may take action in accordance with law.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Soumitra Saikia, J.) disposed of a writ petition by Nur Mahammad challenging an eviction notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the DFO, Nagaon, which called on him to produce documents supporting possession over plots of land within 15 days failing which he would be evicted. Balancing the equities, and irrespective of whether any reply had earlier been filed, the Court permitted fresh replies to the Show Cause Notice to be submitted by 22.01.2026 along with documents; if filed in time, the replies were to be considered expeditiously with an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. If no reply is filed within time, the authorities may proceed in accordance with law; and if the consideration goes against the petitioner, a further 15 days is afforded to vacate before action is taken. The Court recorded rival contentions on whether the land is reserved forest land but left that question to the consideration process.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010286412025

undefined

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

Case No. : WP(C)/7461/2025

NUR MAHAMMAD

S/O ISMAIL ALI, VILL. - LONGJUMP 700 ACRE PADUMONI, MAUZA - GORUBAT, P.O. - BARPANI, P.S. KOCHUA, DIST. - NAGAON ASSAM, PIN -782426

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM , REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37.

5:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

ASSAM

Page No.# 2/4

PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37. 6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER

NAGAON DIVISION NAGAON PIN -782001. 7:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER NAGAON DISTRICT NAGAON PIN -782001. 8:THE CIRCLE OFFICER KAMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE NAGAON PIN - 782426. 9:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE

KACHUA POLICE STATION NAGAON PIN 78242

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S B CHOUDHURY, MS. M DAS,MR A N AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FOREST,SC, REVENUE

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

ORDER

05.01.2026

Heard Ms. S. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I. Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to an eviction notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the DFO, Nagaon. By the said notice, the petitioner was

Page No.# 3/4

directed to produce the documents to support his possession over the plots of land within a period of 15 days failing which he is to be evicted from the said land.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is in occupation of land in question since a long period of time and the same is not any reserved forest land. It is contended that the representation has been filed after the impugned notice which has not been considered.

5. Mr. I. Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department has submitted that adequate time was granted to the petitioner to show cause which does not appear to has been done and the land in question are reserved forest land. He has emphasized the requirement of making all forest land encroachment free which is also the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

6. Considering the rival submissions and balancing the equities, irrespective of whether any reply has been filed earlier or not, let fresh replies be submitted against the Show Cause Notice within 22.01.2026 along with documents. If such replies are filed within the specified time, the same are required to be considered expeditiously in which the petitioner be given an opportunity of personal hearing. It is made clear that in case the reply is not filed within the time specified, the respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

7. It is also provided that in case the consideration goes against the petitioner, further 15 days time be afforded to him to vacate the land in question failing which the authorities would have the liberty to take actions in accordance with law.

Page No.# 4/4

8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant