Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010084842023 2025:GAU-AS:3738- DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : 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.# 2/5 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, PIN- 782435. Page No.# 3/5 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 petitioner/appellant(s) : Mr. R.P. Kakoti, Sr. Advocate Mr. S. Sutradhar, Advocate For respondent(s) : Ms. D.S. Neog, Advocate Ms. S. Sarma, GA, Assam – BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR 01.04.2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ) This writ appeal is filed by the appellants being aggrieved with the order dated 14.03.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 1864/2022, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed on behalf of the appellants. The appellants approached the writ court with the grievance that the respondent Irrigation Department was in illegal occupation of the land belonging to the appellants, which was being owned by their grandfather (the description of which is given in the impugned order), since the year 1965 without paying any compensation Page No.# 4/5 to the family of the appellants. It is to be noticed that the respondents in the writ petition did not contest the claim of the appellants by filing any counter affidavit. However, the learned Single Judge has refused to interfere in the matter solely on the ground that the appellants had failed to place any material on record to suggest that the land was ever acquired by the respondent department and the claim of the appellants for compensation for the alleged acquisition of the land in the year 1965 is belated and, therefore, no relief can be granted to the appellants while exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. During pendency of this writ appeal, the appellants filed additional affidavit on 20.02.2025, wherein it is stated that the respondent department has already vacated the possession of the land in question and at present the land is in occupation of the appellants. The relevant paragraphs of the said additional affidavit are reproduced hereunder: “(v) That being compelled by the above action of the respondents for not vacating their land, the appellants/ petitioners had filed the instant writ petition praying for issuance of appropriate direction from this Hon’ble Court. The above writ petition having been dismissed on technical ground by the Ld. Single Judge, they have preferred this present appeal against the judgment passed by the Ld. Single Judge, praying the Hon’ble Court for directing the respondents to vacate the said land. (ii) While the instant writ appeal is pending for final disposal, the Chowkidar of the department, through whom the possession of the land was maintained by the Department, had informed the appellants that he was directed by the authority of the department to vacate the temporary Assam type house as well as the land in question and he was also asked to inform the appellants to take charge of the said land. But when the appellant No. 1 asked the said Chowkidar to provide proper official document about vacating of the land by the Department, he simply suggested the appellant to contact the proper office at the department. (iii) That thereafter the appellant No. 1 on 21.11.2024 went to the office of Respondent No. 6 and contacted the said authority for enquiring about the matter and requested him to provide the proper official document confirming Page No.# 5/5 the vacation of land. However, the said authority confirmed the appellant No. 1 that the department did not require the said land anymore as the Govt. had already provided appropriate land to the Department for establishing their permanent office etc. and asked the appellant to take charge of their land. However, the said authority refused to issue any official document regarding vacating or handing over the possession of land to the appellants. On further insistence made by the appellant, the said authority simply told him that there was no recorded agreement between the Department and the grandfather of the appellants when the possession of the land was taken by the Department and therefore, they were unable to issue any recorded document regarding handing over possession of the said land to the appellants. The said authority further suggested the appellant that since the Department has vacated the land and the appellants’ possession over the land has been automatically resumed, there existed no obligation upon the department to issue any withdrawal letter in this regard.” In view of the fact that as per the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the appellants, when the respondent department has already vacated the land and the same is at present in possession of the appellants and their names have already been recorded in the revenue record and no counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents, we are of the view that no further order is required to be passed in this writ appeal. Accordingly, this writ appeal is disposed of with the above observations. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant