Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010155242022 2025:GAU-AS:3653 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5161/2022 JAKIR AND 4 ORS. S/O LT. IMAN ALI, VILL- SIDHANI P.O - SITULI, P.S BAGHBOR DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781314. 2: MOINAL HAQUE S/O LT. IMAN ALI VILL- SIDHANI P.O - SITULI P.S BAGHBOR DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781314. 3: SAMSUL HAQUE S/O LT. IMAN ALI VILL- SIDHANI P.O - SITULI P.S BAGHBOR DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781314. 4: AKBAR ALI S/O LT. IMAN ALI VILL- SIDHANI P.O - SITULI P.S BAGHBOR DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781314. 5: NAYAN ALI S/O LT. IMAN ALI VILL- SIDHANI P.O - SITULI P.S BAGHBOR DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781314 VERSUS Page No.# 2/3 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM , DEPTT. OF REVENUE , DISPUR , GUWAHATI - 6. 2:THE DIRECTOR LAND RECORD ASSAM GUWAHATI -32 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BARPETA DIST - BARPETA PIN - 781301 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BAGHBOR REVENUE CIRCLE AT MANDIA P.O - MANDIA DIST- BARPETA PIN - 781308. 5:RAHIM ALI LAT MONDAL BAGHBOR REVENUE CIRCLE P.O - MANDIA DIST- BARPE PIN - 781308. C/O CIRCLE OFFICER BAGHBOR REVENUE CIRCLE AT MANDIA P.O - MANDIA DIST- BARPE PIN - 781308 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID, MR. A ROSHID,MR. T J MAHANTA,MS. M R DEVI,MS. T BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : SC. REVENUE, GA, ASSAM BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 28.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. TJ Mahanta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A Roshid, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. N Bordoloi, learned standing counsel for the Revenue Department and Mr. S Baruah, learned State counsel. 2. The claim of the petitioners is that the patta land of the petitioners under KP Patta No. 44 pertaining to Dag No. 89(O) for an area of 5 Bighas 2 Kathas 5 Lechas Page No.# 3/3 in the village Bhera Gaon within Baghbor Revenue Circle, Mouza-Jania in the district of Barpeta has been converted into Government land without following due process of law inasmuch as the said land earlier diluviated under river Chaul Khowa. Subsequently, when the river changed its direction & course, the land is now illuviated and the petitioners are possessing the same. However, the respondents have converted the same into Government land without due process of law. 3. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that such question may not be determined in a writ proceeding, however, the petitioners may be allowed to file appropriate application before the competent authority raising their grievances in this regards. 4. This court also is of the opinion that such claim of the petitioners will require factual determination and assertion whether the land, which the petitioners claim to be the patta land diluviated and illuviated and whether they are now possessing the same land earlier diluviated in the river Chaul Khowa. 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authority in this regards by filing appropriate application and in the even such application is filed, same may be considered as per law by giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or any other persons that may have any claim over the issue. Such examination be carried out within a period of 6 months from the date of filing of application, that may be filed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant