Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17209 (GAU)

AMIR UDDIN AND 19 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

WP(C)/4661/2025 · 2025-08-17

Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010174172025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4661/2025 AMIR UDDIN AND 19 ORS S/O LATE HASEN ALI, R/O VILL. BATABARI, P.O. SONARIGAON, P.S. DHING, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM. 2: HELLAL UDDIN S/O BABAR ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 3: ASKAR ALI S/O LATE SAYYED ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 4: MRS. SAFILA KHATUN W/O LATE ABED ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 5: HUSSAIN ALI S/O LATE AMSER ALI Page No.# 2/7 R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 6: SAN BANU D/O LATE RAJAB ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 7: ALIM UDDIN S/O LATE SECANDER ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 8: SULTAN ALI S/O LATE CHAFI ULLAH R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 9: HASSEN ALI S/O LATE IMAN ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 10: RAFIQUL ISLAM S/O LATE EUSUB ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING Page No.# 3/7 DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 11: SAMSUDDIN S/O LATE MAINUDDIN R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 12: IMAN ALI S/O LATE SAYYED ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 13: ALI HUSSAIN S/O LATE NAYMUDDIN R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 14: NURUL ISLAM S/O LATE ABDUL HALIM R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 15: FOIJUDDIN @ FAY JUDDIN S/O LAHUBALI R/O 1 NO. BATABARI MOUZA BATADROBA P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING PIN 782123 DIST. NAGAON Page No.# 4/7 ASSAM. 16: JIABUR RAHMAN S/O LATE ABDUL GAFUR R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIPUR P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 17: SIRAJUL HAQUE S/O LATE JAJE SHEIKH R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 18: ABDUL KUDDUSH S/O LATE ABDUL JABBAR R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 19: MR. AMINA KHATUN W/O LATE MUJIBUR RAHMAN R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGOAN P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM. 20: ACHAR ALI S/O LATE RAJAB ALI R/O VILL. BATABARI P.O. SONARIGAON P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM VERSUS Page No.# 5/7 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. , REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT. JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE DIST. COMMISSIONER OLD TRUNK ROAD CHRISTIAN PATTY NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782001 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DHING REVENUE CIRCLE NAGAON ASSAM PIN 78310 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. Z KHALID, MS S Z HAYAT,MR. S M MUNIR,MR. M H ALI,MR. K MOHAMMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 18.08.2025 Heard Shri Z Khalid, learned counsel for the petitioners, who are aggrieved by the notice dated 25.07.2025 whereby they have been directed to vacate the land under their possession by terming them as illegal encroachers. Page No.# 6/7 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they were allotted land by the Circle Officers by various orders as they were landless and they are in continuous possession. It is also the case of the petitioners that in the meantime, they have filed application for proper settlement and issuance of patta and without considering the same, the impugned notice has been issued. 3. Shri R Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department, Assam, has, however disputed the factual proposition and has submitted that the orders sought to be relied upon were conditional orders which otherwise, do not appear to be in consonance with the Rules holding the field. He has submitted that there is no dispute that the land in question is grazing land and the same is reflected from the impugned notice itself. He has submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagpal Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in (2011) 11 SCC 396 has clearly laid down that the VGR land is community land which cannot be allotted and should be made encroachment free. 4. From a bare perusal of the impugned notice, it clearly appears that the land in question is grazing land. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of Jagpal Singh & Ors. (supra), has made the following observations: “23. Before parting with this case we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorised occupants of the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/ poramboke/shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show-cause notice and a brief hearing. Long Page No.# 7/7 duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularising the illegal possession. Regularisation should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some government notification to landless labourers or members of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land.” 5. In view of the aforesaid provision of law which has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the opinion that no interference is called for with regard to the impugned notice. 6. At this stage, Shri Khalid, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners cannot be left remediless. 7. In view of the above, the petitioners may submit application for allotment of land which is, otherwise permitted in law and if such application(s) is filed, the competent authority may consider the same which, however has to be done strictly in accordance with law. Writ petition stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant