Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/7 vs Safiqur Rahman Talukdar And 9 Ors on 17 November, 2025
Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010091232025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./62/2025
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT
OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.
2: THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION
ASSAM, CANDARA
GUWAHATI-781003
3: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
NAGAON DIVISION
IRRIGATION
NAGAON, DISTRICT NAGAON
ASSAM-782001
4: THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
JAMUNAMUKH SUB DIVISION IRRIGATION
DOBOKA TOWN
WARD NO. 10
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-78244
VERSUS
SAFIQUR RAHMAN TALUKDAR AND 9 ORS.
S/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR, R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON, PO AND
PS DOBOKA, DISTRICT HOJAI, ASSAM-782440.
2:CHIDDEKHA BEGUN
D/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI, ASSAM-782440
Page No.# 2/7
3:MUSLIMA BEGUM
D/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782440
4:AKLIMA BEGUM
D/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782440
5:FATIMA BEGUM
D/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782440
6:JUBEDA BEGUM
D/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782440
7:KHALILUR RAHMAN TALUKDAR
S/O. LT. MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
R/O. VILLAGE NAHARGAON
PO AND PS DOBOKA
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782440
8:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
NAGAON
DISTRICT NAGAON
ASSAM-782001
9:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
HOJAI
SANKARDEVNAGAR
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-782435
10:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
HOJAI REVENUE CIRCLE
Page No.# 3/7
HOJAI
DISTRICT HOJAI
ASSAM-78243
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. D S NEOG,
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
Linked Case : WA/146/2023
SAFIQUR RAHMAN TALUKDAR AND 6 ORS.
S/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
2: CHIDDEKHA BEGUM
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
3: MUSLIMA BEGUM
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM
PIN- 782440.
4: AKLIMA BEGUM
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM
PIN- 782440.
5: FATIMA BEGUM
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
Page No.# 4/7
6: JUBEDA BEGUM
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
7: KHALILUR RAHMAN
D/O- LATE MUBESAR ALI TALUKDAR
VILL.- NAHARGAON
P.O. AND P.S. DOBOKA
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS.
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVT. OF ASSAM
IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION
ASSAM, CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-3.
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
NAGAON,DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM, PIN- 782001.
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HOJAI
SANKARDEVNAGAR
DIST.- HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782435.
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
NAGAON DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
NAGAON
DIST.- NAGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 782001.
6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
HOJAI DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM
Page No.# 5/7
PIN- 782435.
7:THE ASSTT. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
JAMUNAMUKH
SUB-DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
DOBOKA TOWN
WARD NO. 10, DIST.- HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782440.
8:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
HOJAI REVENUE CIRCLE
DIST.- HOJAI
ASSAM, PIN- 782435.
------------
For the Petitioner/appellant(s) : Mr. P. Nayak, Addl. AG, assam
For the Respondent(s) :
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
17.11.2025
(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)
The State is in review against a judgment dated 01.04.2025, passed
by a coordinate Bench in Writ Appeal No. 146/2023.
The respondents/writ petitioners preferred a writ petition before this
Court seeking intervention and direction to the respondents
therein/petitioner herein to either release the land belonging to them,
which was stated to have been acquired by the State sometime in the
year 1965, or to pay to the writ petitioners reasonable compensation for
the land so acquired.
Before the matter could be adjudicated and the State could file
counter affidavit in the appeal, an additional affidavit was filed by the
Page No.# 6/7
writ petitioners intimating the Court that the land in question had already
been released by the State because the office of the Irrigation
Department, which was in occupation of the land, had been relocated
somewhere else.
Considering the statement as a correct exposition of fact, the
Appellate Court disposed of the writ appeal holding that no order was
required to be passed.
It is also required to be noted here that the writ petition was
dismissed on the ground of delay in approaching the Court and also for
the failure on the part of the petitioners to bring in necessary materials in
support of their claim that the land in question had been acquired by the
State and no compensation was paid to the land owners.
However, the fact is otherwise, which finds mention in the review
petition.
The contention of the review petitioners/State is that the claim of the
respondents/writ petitioners that the land was vacated by the Irrigation
Department is absolutely false. Such claim was made by the respondents
before the appellate Court merely on the basis of some communication
made by a clerk in the Revenue Department. However, the fact is that
the Executive Engineer of the concerned Division in the Irrigation
Department has confirmed that the land in question still remains in
possession of the Irrigation Department without any unauthorized
occupation or encroachment. Additionally, it has been brought to the
notice of this Court that a Draft Chitha No. 1968-69, which could be
collected, indicates that the land was transferred to Jamuna Irrigation
Office vide Registered Deed dated 26.10.1964, executed by the writ
Page No.# 7/7
petitioners' grandfather, Makram Ali.
The contention of the review petitioners is that the land remains in
their possession since the year 1964 and no effort was ever made by
anyone of the heirs of the land holder to have any compensation paid,
or the land released to them because it was not in use. It was only later in
the year 2021 that revenue was deposited for the year 2013-2014.
Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the review petitioners asserts that
there is one complaint made by the writ petitioners in the year 1995, but
the State has seriously challenged the authenticity of the afore-noted
complaint, perhaps because it was not signed.
He submits that this review petition has been filed only for the
reason of correction of the statement of fact made in the appellate
order with respect to the land in question.
That apart, the writ petitioners, according to the review petitioners,
had made misleading statements, perhaps for the purpose of taking
advantage of such order in litigation for taking possession of the land in
question, or to manage payment of compensation for the said land.
Let notice be issued to the respondents on requisite steps being
taken by the review petitioners within two weeks from today, by
registered post as well as by usual process, returnable on 28.01.2026.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
