Gauhati High Court
Arun Chandra Paul vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 24 June, 2021
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010089462021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3076/2021
ARUN CHANDRA PAUL
S/O. LT. SACHI MOHAN PAUL, R/O. KHARUPATIA, P.S. AND P.O.
KHARUPATIA, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784147.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPTT.,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.
2:DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE DEPTT.
ASSAM
RUKMINIGAON
GUWAHTI-781022.
3:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DARRANG
MANGALDOI
PIN-784125.
4:KHARUPATIA MUNICIPAL BOARD
REP. BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER KHARUPATIYA
DARRANG-784147.
5:UTTAM SAHA
S/O. LT. REBATI MOHAN SAHA
R/O. WORD NO.-7
GOPAL NAGAR
Page No.# 2/5
KHARUPATIA
P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPATIA
DIST. DARRANG
ASSAM-784147
6:BHABA RANJAN ROY
S/O. LT. SURJA KANTA ROY
R/O. WORD NO.4
GURU PALLY
KHARUPATIA
P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPATIA
DIST. DARRANG
ASSAM-784147
7:ASHIM ROY
S/O. LT. ROHI DAS
R/O. WORD NO.1
JAYANTI NAGAR
KHARUPATIA
P.O. AND P.S. KHARUPATIA
DIST. DARRANG
ASSAM-78414
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P CHALIHA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
24.06.2021
Heard Mr. D.P. Chaliha, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. I. Ahmed, learned
counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. M. Barman, learned Government Advocate
appearing for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. S. Chouhan, learned counsel who appears
for the respondent no.4.
2) At the outset it may be mentioned that though the learned counsel has appeared
Page No.# 3/5
for the respondent no.4 upon instructions, but he has neither filed any vakalatnama nor has
he filed his memo of appearance. Accordingly, the learned counsel shall file his vakalatnama
positively on the next date fixed.
3) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner has challenged the legality of the order dated 18.02.2021 issued by the Executive
Officer of Kharupetia Town Committee (respondent no.4) on petition submitted by the private
respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 for allotment of Gumti no. 86 (formerly Gumti No. 100) under
Kharupetia Municipal Board, thereby upholding the order dated 05.12.2002 by the then
Executive Officer. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner projects that he was the
previous allottee and that his allotment letter was otherwise valid in all respects.
4) The learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 by referring to the records of W.P.(C)
5334/2013, pending before this Court, submits that the petitioner had sublet his allotted
Gumti to the respondent nos. 5 to 7 and thereafter disputes and differences arose which led
to filing of TS No. 12/2003, TS 13/2003 and TS No. 14/2003 by the petitioner before the
Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Darrang, Mangaldoi for recovery of arrear rent. The
said suit was decreed on 23.12.2005 in favour of the petitioner. But the said three decree was
reversed by dismissal of the suit in connection with appellate judgment and decree dated
06.12.2006 passed by the learned District Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi in TA No. 2/2006, TA
No. 3/2006 and TA No. 4/2006. The aggrieved petitioner preferred revision before this Court,
which was registered and numbered as Civil Rev. No. 88/2007, Civil Rev. No. 89/2007, and
Civil Rev. No. 90/2007. It is submitted that the said three civil revision petitions were
dismissed by this Court by order dated 12.03.2015. Accordingly, it is submitted that the
petitioner lost his right in respect of the said Gumti No. 86 and accordingly, it is submitted
that there was no merit in the present writ petition.
5) Issue notice returnable on 05.08.2021.
Page No.# 4/5
6) As the learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent
nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. S. Chouhan, learned counsel accepts notice for the respondent no.4,
requisite additional copy of the writ petition with enclosures be served on them by the
learned counsel for the petitioner within 2 (two) days. Within 2 (two) days, the petitioner
shall take steps for service of notice on the respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 by registered post and
by courier service by routing the process through the Registry of the Court and upon service
an affidavit of service shall be filed before the next date fixed.
7) The learned senior counsel for the petitioner has been able to show a prima facie
case because it appears that on the suit for recovery of arrear rent filed by the petitioner
being dismissed, the respondent no.4 has taken a view that the petitioner has lost his right
over Gumti No. 86 (formerly Gumti No. 100) of Kharupetia Municipal Board. Accordingly, the
Court is inclined to stay the operation of the impugned order under Memo No.
KMB/Gen/Misc/2020-21/Pt/4429 dated 18.02.2021 passed by the Executive Officer,
Kharupetia Town Committee (respondent no.4) till further order.
8) The Court also takes note that in W.P.(C) 5334/2013, which is filed by the
respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 herein, this Court by order dated 13.09.2013, had ordered that in
the interim, status quo as regards possession of Gumti No. 86 of Kharupetia Daily Market as
on that day, shall be maintained. It is clarified that this order passed in the present writ
petition would have no consequences or effect in respect of the order dated 13.09.2013
passed in W.P.(C) 5334/2013.
9) List on 05.08.2021 along with W.P.(C) 5334/2013.
JUDGE
Page No.# 5/5
Comparing Assistant
