Gauhati High Court
Page No. 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 10 March, 2023
Page No. 1/4
GAHC010052692023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1335/2023
AMBIKA PEGU DOLEY AND 5 ORS.
W/O- NAGEN DOLEY, R/O- H.NO. 26A, RUDRA SINGHA PATH, USHA
NAGAR, P.O. HENGRABARI, P.S. DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781036, KAMRUP (M),
ASSAM
2: JIBON KONWAR
S/O- LAKHESWAR KONWAR
R/O- RUDRA SINGHA PATH
USHA NAGAR
P.O. HENGRABARI
P.S. DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781036
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
3: DHANI RAM SARMA
S/O- LATE BASANTA SARMA
R/O- RUDRA SINGHA PATH
BYLANE NO. 2
USHA NAGAR
P.O. HENGRABARI
P.S. DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781036
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
4: PAPUMONI SARMA BHAGABATI
S/O- SRI T. CH. SARMA
R/O- BARBARI
USHA NAGAR
P.O. BELTOLA
P.S. DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781036
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
Page No. 2/4
5: TARUN CHANDRA DAS
S/O- LATE GANESH CHANDRA DAS
R/O- H.NO. 69
BARBARI
USHA NAGAR
RUDRA SINGHA PATH
P.O. HENGRABARI
P.S. DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781036
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
6: SRIMANTA ROY
S/O- LATE KESHAB CH. ROY
R/O- H.NO. 47
BARBARI
RUDRA SINGHA PATH
USHA NAGAR
P.O. HENGRABARI
P.S. DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781036
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE
(SETTLEMENT) DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-06 (ASSAM)
2:THE GUWAHATI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORUTY
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
BHANGAGARH
GHY-06 (ASSAM)
3:THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER
GUWAHATI- 781006 (ASSAM)
4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
KAMRUP (M)
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI- 781036
ASSAM
5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE DISPUR
Page No. 3/4
GUWAHATI- 78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D K DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 10.03.2023
Heard Mr. M. Khataniar, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. R. Borpujari, learned
Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 1; Mr. S. Bora, learned
Standing Counsel, GMDA and GMC for the respondent nos. 2 & 3; and Ms. M. Barman,
learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 4 & 5.
2. The petitioners, 6 [six] in nos., have approached this Court with the claim that they are
landless indigenous people and they are in possession of different parcels of land under Dag
no. 3329 [new]/602 [old] at Village - Hengrabari, Revenue Village - Borbari Kisam, Mauza -
Beltola, Dispur Revenue Circle by constructing small dwelling houses with different holding
nos. from the respondent GMC authorities. According to the petitioners, they are in
possession of those parcels of land for a period of more than 15 years. Apprehending that
there might be an eviction drive in the near future the petitioners have approached this Court
seeking relief in the form of consideration of their cases for allotment/settlement in terms of
the prevailing land policy of the State Government and not to undertake any forceful eviction
of the petitioners from the parcels of land under their possession.
3. Mr. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department has submitted that the
parcels of land which the petitioners are claiming to be under their possession falls under
Schedule III [Silsako Beel] of the Guwahati Water Bodies [Preservation and Conservation]
Act, 2008 and as such, the petitioners are not entitled for any kind of protection from
eviction. He has further submitted that a number of persons, similarly situated like the
present petitioners, had earlier approached this Court seeking similar reliefs by way of
different writ petitions, W.P.[C] no. 1156/2023 and others and the Court by a common
Page No. 4/4
judgment and order dated 03.03.2023 had dismissed those writ petitions.
4. Issue notice, returnable in 3 [three] weeks.
5. As Mr. Borpujari has appeared and accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no. 1;
Mr. Bora has appeared and accepted notices on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 & 3; and Ms.
Barman has appeared and accepted notices on behalf of the respondent nos. 4 & 5, no
formal notices need to be issued in respect of the said respondents. The learned counsel for
the petitioner shall serve extra copies of the writ petition along with annexures, to Mr.
Borpujari, Mr. Bora and Ms. Barman within 3 [three] working days.
6. As the similar issues, as raised in this writ petition, have already been decided by the
common judgment and order dated 03.03.2023 passed in the writ petitions, W.P.[C] no.
1156/2023 and others, this Court is not persuaded to pass any interim order and the prayer
for interim relief is declined.
7. Mr. Khataniar, learned counsel for the petitioners has, however, submitted that at
paragraph no. 48 of the common judgment and order dated 03.03.2023, liberty has been
granted to the petitioners therein to individually approach the authorities by submitting
written representations with supporting documents and as such, the same liberty may be
made available to the petitioners. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and the
observations made in the paragraph no. 48 of the common judgment and order dated
03.03.2023 [supra], it is observed that the petitioners are at liberty to submit written
representations before the authorities in the same manner as observed therein and also as
regards their claims for allotment or settlement as per the prevailing land policy.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
