Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 3 November, 2025
Author: K.R. Surana
Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010239552025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6172/2025
MEZZO TRADING PVT LTD AND ANR
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING
ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT 5TH FLOOR, APARTMENT NO.19, 10 HAILEY
ROAD, NEW DELHI -110001 AND REPRESENTED HEREIN THROUGH ITS
DIRECTOR, SHRI PANNALAL BHANSALI, SON OF LATE HIRALAL
BHANSALI.
2: SHRI PANNALAL BHANSALI
SON OF LATE HIRALAL BHANSALI AND A RESIDENT OF 5TH FLOOR
APARTMENT NO.19
10 HAILEY ROAD
NEW DELHI - 110001
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, ASSAM SECRETARIAT,
GUWAHATI - 781006, ASSAM.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
ASSAM SECRETARIAT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI - 781006
ASSAM.
3:THE LEGAL REMEMBRANCER CUM COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
ASSAM SECRETARIAT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI - 781006
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/5
4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM. PIN - 781036
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, MR A DEKA,MR A BHATRA,N
CHAUDHURY,MR. M DAS,MR. B D DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT
DEPT
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
Date : 03.11.2025:
(K.R. Surana, J)
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by
Mr. B.D. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. Bora,
learned Govt. Advocate for the State respondent nos. 1, 3 and 5 and Mr. R.
Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the Revenue Department, representing
respondent no.2.
2) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioners have prayed (i) for declaring the Assam Land
(Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1964
Act" for brevity) as repugnant to the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
(hereinafter referred to as "the 2013 Act" for brevity; (ii) for declaring the 1964
Act as ultra vires the Constitution of India; (iii) for setting aside all notifications
and proceedings issued under the 1964 Act including notifications/ notices dated
Page No.# 3/5
23.07.2025 and 26.08.2025; (iv) for releasing the land of the land of the
petitioners from the purview of the 1964 Act.
3) The submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner,
in brief, that as the 2013 Act on land acquisition, which is a Central Act, is
holding the field, by implication and operation of Article 254 of the Constitution
of India, the 1964 Act stands impliedly repealed and therefore, by way of State
Amendment in the 2013 Act vide Assam Act No. VII of 2025, which had received
the assent of the President of India on 08.05.2025, the 1964 Act cannot be
brought in force.
4) The issue raised in this writ petition requires further
examination. As the learned Government and Departmental counsel insists on a
short date, issue Rule returnable on 10.11.2025. Also issue notice on the prayer
for interim relief, returnable on the same date.
5) Requisite extra copies of the writ petition with all enclosures
shall be served on the learned Govt. Advocate and the learned Departmental
counsel on 04.11.2025.
6) Heard both sides on the prayer for interim relief for staying the
operation of the 1964 Act in respect of the land of the petitioners.
7) The learned senior counsel for the petitioner relies on his
submissions referred to hereinbefore and it has been submitted that if the
possession of the land is taken over, the situation would be irreversible. It has
also been submitted that the land acquisition compensation, having not been
paid to the petitioners, they cannot be dispossessed from their land.
8) The said prayer is vehemently opposed by the learned Govt.
Advocate and by the learned standing counsel for the Revenue Department on
Page No.# 4/5
the ground that several writ petitions, being W.P.(C) Nos. 3989/2022,
5626/2024, 5624/2024 were filed to assail the land acquisition process initiated
for parcel of land in the vicinity of the land of the petitioner, but no stay had
been granted. Moreover, it has been submitted that this Court by order dated
31.05.2023, passed in W.P.(C) 2834/2023 and rejected the challenge to the
acquisition of land by a similar notification that has been assailed in this writ
petition. Moreover, it has been submitted that a similar challenge was rejected
by this Court by judgment and order dated 22.05.2023, passed in W.P.(C)
3528/2022 and W.P.(C) 3989/2022, and on Intra-Court appeal against the said
decision, vide common judgment and order dated 14.08.2023, passed in W.A.
No. 280/2023 and W.A. No. 309/2023, the Division Bench of this Court had
dismissed the appeal by observing that the land acquisition payment would be
payable under 2013 Act. It has also been submitted that the competent
authorities had issued notice to the petitioners to provide bank particulars and
indemnity bond so that the determined and sanctioned acquisition
compensation can be paid into the account of the petitioners, but the petitioners
have intentionally avoided to provide the requisite particulars and thus,
prevented the State from depositing land acquisition compensation to the
petitioners. It has been submitted that the public purpose would be defeated by
any stay granted by the Court.
9) Thus, from the submissions made at the Bar, it is not in dispute
that land acquisition compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioners.
Therefore, the condition precedent for taking possession of the land has not
been complied with.
10) Accordingly, as the Rule has been made returnable at a very
short date, as an interim measure, it is provided that the petitioners shall not be
Page No.# 5/5
dispossessed from their land in question till the next date of listing.
11) It is made clear that the extension or continuation of the interim
order shall not be automatic and/or by default, but shall be subject to further
order(s) that may be passed on the next date fixed.
12) List on 10.11.2025.
JUDGE JUDGE.
Comparing Assistant
