Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010078872025 2025:GAU-AS:5494 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2335/2025 NONONIE MD BADAR UDDIN AND ANR S/O- ABUL KASHEM NONONIE, R/O- VILL- AND PO- DAGAON, PS JURIA, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782124 2: NONONIE MD NASIR UDDIN S/O ABUL KASHEM NONONIE R/O VILL AND PO DAGAON PS JURIA DIST NAGAON ASSAM PIN 78212 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP BY THE COMM AND SECY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DM LR DEPTT, DISPUR, GHY- 06 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT GOVT OF ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI 37 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER NAGAON DIST NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782001 4:THE CEO NAGAON ZILA PARISHAD DIST NAGOAN ASSAM PIN 782001 5:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER JURIA DEVELOPMENT BLOCK DAGAON DIST NAGOAN ASSAM PIN Page No.# 2/4 782124 6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER JURIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT DAGON DIST NAGOAN ASSAM PIN 782124 7:THE BAZAR COMMITTEE OF THE ARABARI SUB WEEKLY BAZAR PO DAGAON PS JURIA DIST NAGAON ASSAM PIN 78212 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M A ISLAM, MR J I MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : SC. REVENUE, SC, P AND R.D.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 05-05-2025 Heard Mr. MA Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that the petitioners were allotted a plot of land in the Arabari sub-weekly bazaar, under the Juria Anchalik Panchayat, vide Allotment Order dated 21.01.2019. On the basis of a House Construction Permission dated 25.06.2019, issued by the Executive Officer, Juria Anchalik Panchayat, the petitioners constructed a temporary shop over the Plot No. 89 by using silpaulin sheets, etc. However, on 11.02.2025, some miscreants, at the behest of the Bazar Committee of the Arabari sub-weekly Bazar, demolished the shop of the petitioners. Though the petitioners have submitted an FIR to the O/c Juria Police Station and a representation dated 20.03.2025 to the Executive Officer, Juria Anchalik Panchayat, for allotment of an alternative plot of land for establishment of the petitioners’ shop, the authorities have Page No.# 3/4 not taken a decision on the same till date. He submits that the present writ petition can be disposed of, if a decision is taken on the petitioners representation dated 20.03.2025. 2. Mr. AK Ghosh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 & 6; Mr. SR Boruah, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. J Handique, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submit that they have got no objection to the prayer made by the petitioners’ counsel. However, there is nothing to show that the submission made by the petitioners’ counsel and the averments made in the writ petition are true. 3. The above being said, this Court fails to understand as to why the petitioners do not rebuild their shop on the land already allotted to them. 4. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, at the motion stage itself. Without going into the merits of the case or coming to a finding, as to whether the averments made by the petitioners in this writ petition are true or not, this Court is of the view that the petitioners’ representation dated 20.03.2025 should be decided by the respondent No. 6 and the decision taken thereafter be communicated to the petitioners. 5. Accordingly, the respondent No. 6 shall take a decision on the petitioners’ representation dated 20.03.2025, as per his/her own discretion, keeping in mind the fact that this Court is unaware of the correctness of the averments made by the petitioners in this writ petition. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of 3 (three) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of Page No.# 4/4 this order and the decision taken should thereafter be communicated to the petitioners. 6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant