Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010170082016
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2246/2016
GOPESH DAS and ANR
S/O LT. BICHITRA DAS, REP. BY HIS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY, SRI RANJIT
DUTTA, PETITIONER NO. 2 BELOW, VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE,
PART-I, P.O. GHARMURA-788162, DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM
2: RANJIT DUTTA
S/O LT. RASHIK LAL DUTTA
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-62
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FOREST DEPTT.,
DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
ASSAM
REHABARI
GHY-8
3:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
SOUTHERN ASSAM CIRCLE
P.O. SILCHAR-788701
ASSAM
4:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
HAILAKANDI DIVISION
P.O. HAILAKANDI-788151
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
5:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER
GHARMURA RANGE
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
6:CHANCHALA DAS
D/O LT. KIRENDRA DAS
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
7:MITHUN DAS
S/O LT. JHUNU DAS
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
8:BISHNU DAS
S/O LT. JHUNU DAS
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
9:MATANGINI DAS
W/O LT. SURENDRA DAS
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
10:KRISHNA KANTA DAS
S/O LT. BASANTA DAS
VILL. GHARMURA FOREST VILLAGE
PART-I
P.O. GHARMURA-788162
DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T U LASKAR
Page No.# 3/3
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA
ORDER
28.01.2021 Heard Mr. N Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also present Mr. K P Pathak, learned standing counsel for the Forest department.
The petitioners in order to establish their right to possess the land under the Gharmurah Forest village as apparent from the impugned order dated 03.03.2016 tried to establish his right on the basis of a 'will' of late Bichitra Das admittedly the allottee of the land in dispute, a gift deed and also as a son of late Bichitra Das. Petitioner No. 2 also relied the judgment passed in T.A. 27/2013 of the learned Civil Judge, Hailakandi dated 21.11.2015 but the Divisional Forest Officer or any other forest officer was not impleaded in the said appeal nor in the suit. In view of the nature of the fact on the basis of which the petitioner No. 2 has claimed right to possess the forest land, Mr. Pathak shall inform this court whether the parties can be referred to decide the dispute by a civil court after impleading the Government and department of forest as the necessary parties.
Accordingly, let this matter be listed on 09.02.2021.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant