Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010081332025 2025:GAU-AS:8501 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2623/2025 ANJUMA BEGUM D/O JOYNAL ABEDIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BILASIPARA, WARD NO 8, NEAR ROYAL ACADEMY SCHOOL, P.O. AND P.S.- BILASIPARA, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783301 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-06 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783301 3:ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER REVENUE DHUBRI ASSAM 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BILASIPARA REVENUE CIRCLE DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783348 5:MANOWAR HUSSAIN SON OF MATIAR RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BILASIPARA TOWN WARD NO 8 NEAR ROYAL ACADEMY SCHOOL P.O.- HAKAMA Page No.# 2/5 P.S.- BILASIPARA DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783348 6:BALIJA KHATUN WIFE OF MANOWAR HUSSAIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BILASIPARA TOWN WARD NO 8 NEAR ROYAL ACADEMY SCHOOL P.O.- HAKAMA P.S.- BILASIPARA DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD, MS. F RAHMAN,MS. D BORA,MR S ISLAM,MR S H MAHMUD Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 24/06/2025 1. Heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N Bordoloi, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department for respondent No.1 and Mr. H Sarma, learned State counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. 2. Issue notice to respondent Nos.1 to 4, returnable forthwith. As the respondent Nos.1 to 4 are duly represented, no formal notice is required to be issued. No notice is required to be issued to respondent Nos.5 & 6. 3. The present writ petition is filed with the prayer that the respondent No.4 i.e., The Circle Officer, Bilasipara Revenue Circle be Page No.# 3/5 directed to immediately demarcate the land of the petitioner, remove the illegal constructed CI sheet made by private respondent and handover the possession of the same to the petitioner. The basis of such prayer is reflected in the pleadings made at paragraph Nos.2 and 3. The important pleadings are quoted hereinbelow: i. The petitioner is the owner landholder and possessor of a plot of land measuring 1 katha 5 lecha, covered by Ajmali Miyadi Patta no.80, Dag No.127, which she purchased on 05/09/2018 by dint of registered sale deed from Guhur Ali son of late Nujrul, vide registered sale deed no.365 of Bilasipara sub registry office. After purchasing the land, she took over the possession of the same, got over the Chitha mutation of the land and has been paying land revenue to the government regularly till today. ii. But it is a matter of regret that the private respondents during the night of 23/10/2024 at about 11.30 pm, accompanied by some of their family members, illegally trespassed the land of the petitioner and forcefully occupied about 6 Lecha land and constructed boundary wall by CI sheets and also brought various materials like stones etc to make the wall permanent. iii. The petitioner requested the Circle Officer, Bilasipara Revenue Circle to take notice of the matter and also to take immediate action against them as per law i.e., to hand over the land to her recovering from the possessions of the private respondents. As the land is nearby the house of the private respondents, they occupied it easily. Page No.# 4/5 4. The alleged encroachers are arrayed as respondent Nos.5 & 6. From the pleadings made in the writ petition, it is absolutely clear that it is the case of the petitioner that the private respondents have forcefully taken over possession of the land in question and this court is of the unhesitant view that such dispute is a private dispute involving the claim of the petitioner’s right title and interest and possession over the aforesaid land and the resultant infringement of such right at the hands of the private respondents. 5. Law is by now well settled that though under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, the revenue authorities shall have the power to demarcate lands on the application of the aggrieved party by issuing proper notice to the interested parties, however, when such demarcation is based on an allegation that the land sought to be demarcated has already been encroached by some private respondents and the aggrieved party is not in possession, more particularly, like the present case, where, from the pleadings as quoted hereinabove, clearly shows that the dispute involves right title and interest and possession, the course of action open to the aggrieved party is to approach the competent Civil Court inasmuch as in such a situation, the revenue authorities shall have no power to handover the possession to the petitioner, as prayed in this writ petition. 6. It is made clear that in the event the petitioner files an application only for demarcation, such application may be considered in terms of the Right of Public Service Act, 2012 and rules framed thereunder, however, in the given facts of the present case, even if demarcation is carried out, the possession either of the petitioner or Page No.# 5/5 the respondent Nos.4 & 5 shall not be disturbed during such demarcation, inasmuch as such dispute of possession can only be resolved by the competent Civil Court. 7. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands closed. 8. The parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant