[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam on 2 February, 2026
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010003062026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/432/2026
SHRI BABBAN CHAUHAN
SON OF LATE TUPHAN CHAUHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERONI
MAJGAON P.O. P.S. KHERONI, DISTRICT WEST KARBI. 782448
2: SHRI SANJAY KUMAR CHAUHAN
SON OF LATE TUPHAN CHAUHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERONI
MAJGAON P.O. P.S. KHERONI
DISTRICT WEST KARBI.782448
3: SHRI BALADEO MALA
S/O LATE RAGHUBIR MALA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERONI MAJGAON P.O. AND P.S. KHERONI
DISTRICT WEST KARBI.782448
4: SHRI BINAY KUMAR CHAUHAN
SON OF LATE TUPHAN CHAUHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERONI
MAJGAON P.O. P.S. KHERONI
DISTRICT WEST KARBI.782448
5: SHRI CHUBANARAJAN CHAUHAN
S/O LATE RAMDHARI CHAUHAN
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERONI MAJGAON P.O. P.S. KHERONI
DISTRICT WEST KARBI.78244
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LAND REVENUE AND DISASTER
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR ASSAM PIN-781006.
Page No.# 2/5
2:THE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL
THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DIPHU
782460
3:THE SECRETARY
HILL AREA DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GOVT. OF ASSAM
DISPUR 781006
4:THE SECRETARY
LAND AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL
DIPHU 782460
5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
WEST KARBI ANGLONG
HAMREN
782486
6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
WEST KARBI ANGLONG
HAMREN
782486
7:THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER DONKA
REVENUE CIRCLE
DONKAMOKAM
WEST KARBI ANGLONG
782485
8:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
KHERONI POLICE STATION
KARBI ANGLONG
78244
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DOLEY, MR. R P SARMAH
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE,SC, K A A C
Page No.# 3/5
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
02.02.2026
Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Deka,
learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Chetia, learned Standing
Counsel KAAC for the respondents Nos. 2, 4 and 7; Mr. N. Das, learned
Government Advocate for the respondents Nos. 3, 5, 6 and 8; Ms. P.R. Mahanta,
learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent No. 1.
2. The petitioners 5 in numbers claim to be residents of Hawaipur Mouza
under Donka Revenue Circle, West Karbi Anglong District, Assam. The learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that all these petitioners hailing from Bihar
whose forefathers migrated to the present location in search of different
avocation, particularly agriculture, horticulture, livestock development and
settled permanently on the plots of land by clearing the jungles and making the
land suitable for human habitation and cultivation, while the petitioners have
been paying revenue on the lands which they claim to be under their
occupation, the petitioners were surprised to be informed from the revenue
authorities that they are likely to be evicted in view of notice which was issued
as far back as July, 2024. Copy of the said notice is enclosed as Annexure D on
the writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were
not aware of this notice and it is only after the recent ethnic violences which
have erupted in the West Karbi Anlong District they came to aware of existence
Page No.# 4/5
of the said notice. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no
specific or individual notices have been issued and the petitioners have been
verbally informed that they will be evicted from these lands in terms of the
eviction notice dated 11.07.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioners further
claimed that they are not residing in PGR/VGR land. Being aggrieved the
petitioners are before this Court.
4. Mr. J. Chutia, learned Standing Council, KAAC strongly objects to the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted
that these petitioners have claimed to be occupants of the said lands for the last
several decades but there is no specific description of the land under their
occupation which has been mentioned in the writ petition. Although references
have been made in respect of payment of land revenues and forest use, the
specific particulars pertaining to the land stated to be under their occupation is
not specified in the writ petition and therefore, they cannot have any right over
government land or PGR/VGR land in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in
Jagpal Singh Vs The State of Punjab & Others reported in (2011) 11 SCC 396.
5. The learned Standing Council, KAAC however, submits that if the petitioners
have any particulars of the land under their possession then they should furnish
the same before the respondent No.7.
6. In view of the submissions made and upon perusal of the pleadings
available on the writ petition, this Court is of the view that ends of justice will be
met, if this writ petition is disposed of at this stage without issuing any notice
directing the petitioners to submit the particulars of the land stated to be under
Page No.# 5/5
their occupations along with all relevant documents to substantiate their claims
before the respondent No.7. The petitioners must ensure that the land
particulars permitted to be submitted before the respondent No.7 must be on
individual basis. If the petitioners are able to submit such particulars before the
authorities as permitted by this Court within a period of 15 days from today
then the respondent authority will thereafter, examine the claims and pass
appropriate orders within a period of four weeks thereafter.
7. Till such orders are passed by the respondent authority, the authority will
not proceed to evict the petitioners who had submitted their particulars along
with the representation as permitted by this Court. If in the event in spite of the
liberty being granted by this Court, the petitioners or any of them do not furnish
their particulars before the respondent No.7, then the respondent authority will
be at liberty to take action as per the procedure of law. Accordingly, the matter
disposed of in terms of the above.
8. Copy of this order be marked to the Office of the Standing Counsel, KAAC
for onward communication.
9. Needless to say, in the event the petitioners being aggrieved by orders
passed by the authorities concerned as directed, then they will be at liberty to
approach the appropriate forum for redressal of their grievances.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
