Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010070822025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2309/2025 JAGLAL SAH @ JUGULAL S/O- LATE BISHNATH SAH, R/O- GELEKI CHARIALI, CHUTIA KHANDA, P.O.- GELEKI, P.S.- GELEKI, DIST. - SIVASAGAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD AND 2 ORS. (NOTICE TO BE SERVED THROUGH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR) ONGCL ASSAM ASSET, ERBC, NAZIRA, P.O. AND P.S.-NAZIRA, DISTRICT- SIVASAGAR (ASSAM). PIN-785685 2:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - ASSET MANAGER OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. ASSAM ASSET NAZIRA P.O.- NAZIRA DISTRICT- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN-785685 3:ESTATE OFFICER ONGC NAZIRA ONGCL ASSAM ASSET ERBC NAZIRA P.O AND P.S. NAZIRA DIST- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN-78568 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S C DAS, D R BONGSHIARY,MR. C. SHIL,P BURAGOHAIN Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : MR. T DAS (FOR CAVEATOR), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 02.05.2025 Heard Mr. S.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T. Das, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1-3. 2. The instant writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail a Judgment dated 28.02.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Sivasagar in Misc Appeal no. 33/2022. The Misc Appeal no. 33/2022 was preferred under Section 9 of the Public Premises [Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants] Act, 1971 against an Order no. AA/NZR/ESTATE/EVICTION-DS-GLK#84/2022/1 dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Estate Officer, ONGCL, Assam Asset Nazira, Sivasagar under Section 5 [1] of the Public Premises [Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants] Act, 1971 pursuant to a notice issued under Section 4[1] of the said Act. 3. In the three-Judge decision in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Nandini J. Shah and others, [2018] 15 SCC 356 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that an order passed by a judge as an appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises [Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants] Act, 1971 is an order of a civil court and a challenge thereto must ordinarily proceed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. In view of such legal proposition, Mr. S.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner may be allowed to withdraw this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in order to avail appropriate remedy. 5. The said submission of Mr. S.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by Mr. T. Das, learned counsel for the respondents. Page No.# 3/3 6. In view of the above submission made on behalf of the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed on withdrawal, with the liberty, as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant