Rahul Amin v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Jan 2026WP(C)/7462/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; WP(C)/7462/2025; decided 05.01.2026; Soumitra Saikia; Rahul Amin v. State of Assam; eviction notice 21.11.2025; DFO Nagaon; reserved forest land; encroachment; show cause notice; fresh reply by 22.01.2026; personal hearing; 15 days to vacate; dispossession process; forest eviction; writ disposed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: fresh replies against the Show Cause Notice to be submitted by 22.01.2026 with documents; timely replies to be considered expeditiously with a personal hearing for the petitioner; if the consideration goes against him, a further 15 days to vacate before authorities act in accordance with law; failure to reply within time leaves the authorities free to proceed in accordance with law. ¶¶31

Rahul Amin Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, served with an eviction notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the DFO, Nagaon over plots of land claimed to be within reserved forest land, is entitled to a fresh opportunity to submit replies and supporting documents against the Show Cause Notice and to have them considered expeditiously with a personal hearing before any eviction proceeds.

¶¶29

Court's answer

Irrespective of whether any reply had been filed earlier, the court directed that fresh replies be submitted against the Show Cause Notice within 22.01.2026 along with documents.

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

If the fresh replies are filed within the specified time, they are required to be considered expeditiously and the petitioner is to be given an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

If the reply is not filed within the time specified, the respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶¶29
If the consideration goes against the petitioner, a further 15 days' time is to be afforded to him to vacate the land, failing which the authorities may take action in accordance with law.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (WP(C)/7462/2025, decided 05.01.2026, Soumitra Saikia, J.) - Rahul Amin v. State of Assam & 8 Ors. Petitioner challenged an eviction notice dated 21.11.2025 issued by the DFO, Nagaon requiring him to produce documents supporting possession over plots of land within 15 days failing which he would be evicted; petitioner claimed long occupation and that the land was not reserved forest land, while the Forest Department Standing Counsel asserted the land was reserved forest land and adequate show-cause time had been given. Balancing the equities, the Court disposed of the petition by allowing fresh replies against the Show Cause Notice until 22.01.2026 with documents; timely replies to be considered expeditiously with a personal hearing; if the consideration went against the petitioner, a further 15 days to vacate before lawful action; no reply within time would leave the authorities free to proceed in accordance with law.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010285142025

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/7462/2025

¶6

RAHUL AMIN

¶7

S/O.- ABDUL JAFOR, VILL. - LONGJUMP 700 ACRE (PADUMONI), MAUZA - GORUBAT, P.O. - BARPANI, P.S. KOCHUA, DIST. - NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN - 782426.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

¶11

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

¶12

4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37.

¶13

5:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37.

¶14

6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

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 -782426

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S B CHOUDHURY,

¶18

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

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

05.01.2026

¶23

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

¶24

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 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.

¶25

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is in

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

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.

¶28

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.

¶29

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.

¶30

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.

¶31

8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Rahul Amin v. the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Amin v. the State of Assam and 8 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

Mrs. Krishna Sharma Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.

Mamoni Sarma Vs the State of Assam

Bijit Kumar Ray Vs the State of Assam

Nur Mahammad Vs the State of Assam

Jayantajit Gogoi and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Jamaluddin Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.