Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010175752025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4701/2025 M. K. DEY COLLEGE AND ANR AMRAGHAT, CACHAR, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, DR. MITA DEY, P.O. DARMIKAHAL GRANT, P.S. SONAI, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM 2: MITA DEY W/O- ARUP HOOM CHOUDHURY PRINCIPAL M.K. DEY COLLEGE AMRAGHAT CACHAR ASSAM P.O. DARMIKAHAL GRANT P.S. SONAI DIST. CACHAR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE REGISTRATION AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM 2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEY ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR ASSAM 4:THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CACHAR ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 5:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER SONAI REVENUE CIRCLE CACHAR ASSAM 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER SONAI REVENUE CIRCLE CACHAR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BARBHUIYA, MS A BEGUM,MS S R MAZARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 20.08.2025 Heard Shri AM Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and Shri N. Goswami, learned State Counsel. As per the facts projected, a plot of land measuring 7 bighas under 2nd R.S. Patta No. 1, Dag No. 553/554 was donated by one Phani Bhusan Dey. The said land has however been described as ceiling surplus. The land was to be used for construction of playground for the students and possession was also handed over. The petitioners claim to have applied for settlement, which has not been processed. This Court has however noticed that the petitioners have also expressed grievance against an order passed in August, 2019 by the District Commissioner against which the representation have been submitted on 11.01.2025. The Additional District Commissioner, Cachar vide order dated 24.01.2025 has Page No.# 3/3 however kept in abeyance the construction work of the Sadbhavna Mondop over the plot of land in question. Since the representation of the petitioners are yet to be fully considered and disposed of, the approach at this stage is held to be premature. This writ petition is accordingly closed, however, with an observation that the proceedings which appears to be initiated vide the communication dated 24.01.2025 be brought to a logical conclusion expeditiously. It is needless to state that any party aggrieved with the decision, would have the liberty to approach the appropriate forum. JUDGE Comparing Assistant