Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010102352022 2025:GAU-AS:12757 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3524/2022 AYNAL HOQUE AND 5 ORS S/O- LATE BIAZ UDDIN, VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 15, P.O.- SATRAKONARA, PS- BAGHBAR, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM. 2: HAFIZUR RAHMAN KHAN S/O- LATE SANGSHER KHAN VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 15 P.O.- SATRAKONARA PS- BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. 3: MAHIRUDDIN S/O- LATE NEDU MIA VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 9 P.O.- SATRAKONARA PS- BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. 4: MONIRUL ISLAM S/O- KURJUT ALI VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 15 P.O.- SATRAKONARA PS- BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. 5: FULBAR ALI S/O- ALI HUSSAIN VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 9 P.O.- SATRAKONARA PS- BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM. 6: SHUKUR ALI S/O- LATE RAFE MIAH VILL. SATRAKONARA SEAT NO. 15 P.O.- SATRAKONARA PS- BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS ASSAM REHABARI GUWAHATI-08. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM. 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BAGHBAR REVENUE CIRCLE BAGHBAR DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MANDIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT MANDIA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. 6:HASHMAT ALI S/O- LATE BAHAR UDDIN VILL. SHILOCHI P.O. DHARMAPUR DIST. BARPETA ASSAM. 7:NAIMUDDIN S/O LATE TAIMUDDIN VILL- SILOCHI P.O.- DHARMAPUR Page No.# 3/5 P.S- BAGHBAR DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781308 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M KHAN, MR. R I DEWAN,MR. A R BHUYAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, MR. N HUSSAIN (R-7),SC, P AND R.D.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 17-09-2025 Heard Mr. A. M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for respondent Nos. 1 & 2; Mr. H. Sarma, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent Nos. 3 & 4; and Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P & R.D. Department for respondent No. 5. This writ petition has been instituted by 6 (six) petitioners challenging the notice dated 23.05.2022, issued by the Circle Officer, Baghbar Revenue Circle, whereby the petitioners have been directed to remove the shops and to vacate the land illegally encroached by them. The petitioners claim to be the shopkeepers running a petty business in Milijuli Bazar under Mandia Anchalik Panchayat, District Barpeta, Assam. The said Milijuli Bazar is a government market managed by way of settlement which is situated on a government khas land covered by Dag No. 1 of Village Satrokonara Seat No. 15 under Mauza Mandia. It is the contention of the petitioners that they are running their shops by constructing Assam type rooms over the land. The respondent authorities selectively Page No.# 4/5 issued the impugned notice while allowing the other similarly situated persons to run their shops in the said Milijuli Bazar. Mr. H. Sharma, learned State Counsel, while placing communication dated 06.09.2025, submits that on the application filed by the petitioners, the authority has initiated the process to consider their cases being Misc. Case No. 29/2022 and the eviction proceedings has been discontinued in view of the interim order passed by this Court dated 27.05.2022. Therefore, he submits that the authorities may be permitted to complete the proceedings in the Misc. Case No. 29/2022. Responding to the submission of Mr. Sharma, learned State Counsel, Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, fairly submits that since the authorities have initiated the proceedings, being Misc. Case No. 29/2022, same may be brought to its logical conclusion by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and therefore, the writ petition can be closed with a direction to the respondent authorities to complete the proceedings in the Misc. Case No. 29/2022. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also considering that the proceedings with regard to the grievance raised by the petitioners against an eviction process, has already been initiated by the respondent authorities, I am of the considered view that the proper course of action would be to allow the respondent authorities to complete the proceedings in Misc. Case No. 29/2022. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to complete the proceedings in Misc. Case No. 29/2022 by providing an opportunity of fair hearing to the petitioners within a period of 2 (two) months from today. It is made clear that till the proceedings of Misc. Case No. 29/2022 is Page No.# 5/5 completed, the interim order passed on 27.05.2022 shall continue to operate. Writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant