Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010092892021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3056/2021
DIGANTA DAS
S/O LATE UMA DAS
RESIDENT OF WEST NAMBARI, MALIGAON ,GUWAHATI 781011, KAMRUP
M ASSAM
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS.
THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
RAILWAY, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI
2:THE GENERAL MANAGER (CONSTRUCTION)
N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON
GUWAHATI-781001
3:THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER
MALIGAON
N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON
GUWAHATI-781001
4:INSPECTOR OF WORKS RAILWAYS
N.F. RAILWAY MALIGAON
GUWAHATI-78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P ROY
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NF RLY
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
Page No.# 2/3
ORDER
16.06.2021 Heard Mr. S. P. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. I have also heard Mr. Brijesh Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, N. F. Railway, appearing on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioner herein claims to be in occupation of a plot of land since the year 1960. Apprehending eviction from the said plot of land by the Railway authorities without following the due process of law, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition seeking an order of protection.
By referring to the materials available on record, Mr. S. P. Roy, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, submits that the Estate Officer of the N. F. Railway had earlier served eviction notice upon the petitioner under the provision of Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. The eviction notice was challenged by the petitioner by preferring a statutory appeal before the learned District Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati. By the judgment and order dated 19.01.2019 the appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Estate Officer to pass a fresh order after setting aside the eviction notice. Mr. Roy submits that unless the action contemplated by the judgment and order dated 19.01.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Kamrup(M), is completed in accordance with law, the petitioner cannot be evicted from the plot of land under her occupation. Hence, the present writ petition.
Mr. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, N. F. Railway, has produced a Page No.# 3/3 copy of the written instruction dated 16.06.2021, a perusal of which goes to show that the Railway authorities had crried out measurement of a different plot of land for carrying out certain constructions. Mr. Sharma submits that there is no move to evict the petitioner from the plot of land under his occupation and therefore, this writ petition is based on apprehension which is wholly unfounded. Mr. Sharma, however, does not dispute the proposition that till such time, a fresh order in terms of the judgment and order dated 19.01.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Kamrup(M) is issued by the Estate Officer, the possession of the petitioner over the plot of land in question cannot be disturbed by the respondents. If that be so, there is no surviving cause of action in the writ petition at this point of time for adjudication by this Court.
As such and as agreed to by the learned counsel for both the sides, this writ petition is hereby disposed of at the motion stage by providing that the possession of the petitioner over the plot of land shall not be disturbed by the respondent authorities except by following the due process of law, as indicated in the judgment and order dated 19.01.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Kamrup(M).
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of the written instruction dated 16.06.2021 be retained in the record of this case.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant