Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010181382025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4939/2025 TANBIR KHAN @ HASINA BEGUM S/O MOIN UDDIN, P/R/O BIDYAPUR, P.S.- URIAMGHAT, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785601 AND P/R/A GANDHIBASTI TINIALI, BYE LANE 1, HOUSE NO. 11, GUWAHATI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781003 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, JANATA BHAWAN (ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN (ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX) DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT. JANATA BHAWAN (ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX) DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE AND WILDLIFE O/O THE PCCF AND HOFF ASSAM ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 Page No.# 2/5 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT ASSAM 6:THE CO-DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SARUPATHAR CO-DISTRICT ASSAM 7:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER GOLAGHAT DIVISION GOLAGHAT ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, J B BHARDWAJ,P SHARMA,MS P HALDER,MS. R DEVI,MR. MEHUL SHAH,MR. P S BISWAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE,SC, FOREST BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard Shri J. B. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam assisted by Shri R. Borpujari, learned counsel. As per the facts projected, the petitioner is a transgender person and was in occupation of land within the Rengma Reserve Forest since a long period of time. However, a notice of eviction was issued on 21.07.2025 by the DFO to the father of the petitioner requiring them to vacate the land within 7 days. The petitioner had accordingly approached the DFO on 24.07.2025 and 28.07.2025 praying for resettlement and also for time for relocation. However, on 01.08.2025, the petitioner was evicted from the plot of land in question. The present petition has thereafter been filed with the following relief: Page No.# 3/5 “ Under the above circumstances, it is therefore prayed that Your Lordships would graciously be pleased to admit this petition, call for the records, and issue a Rule, calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus/Certiorari and/or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction of like nature should not be issued to: i. set aside/quash the impugned eviction/demolition notice dated 21/07/2025 and all consequential actions initiated by the Respondent authorities against the Petitioner and his family for his eviction from the land so occupied by them and for demolishing the house standing thereon. ii. declare that the action of the Respondent authorities, including the issuance of notice and initiation of eviction proceedings and demolition of house and dispossession of the petitioner and his family, is illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, and contrary to the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14, Article 19, Article 21, Article 300A of the Constitution of India as well as the different Acts, Rules, Regulations, etc. in force in India. iii. direct the Respondent authorities to undertake a proper inquiry and verification of the rights and possession of the Petitioner and his family over the land and house under question. iv. direct the Respondent authorities to make adequate provisions for rehabilitation and resettlement of the Petitioner along with his family, if so entitled. v. direct the Respondents to adequately compensate the petitioner and his family members for the illegal and arbitrary demolition of the house of the petitioner and his family as well as for illegally and arbitrary dispossessing/evicting the petitioner and his family from the land and house without following the due process of law. vi. Pass such other order(s) as may be deemed just and proper in the interest of justice, equity, and good conscience. And after the cause/causes being shown, if any, and after perusal of the records and upon hearing the parties, Your Lordships may be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/or pass such appropriate Order/Orders or direction as Page No.# 4/5 Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. -AND- Your Lordship may be pleased to grant such further relief(s)/consequential relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your petitioner shall forever pray And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” Shri Bharadwaj, the learned counsel has submitted that there has been violation of his fundamental rights and also the principles of natural justice. On the other hand, Shri Saikia, the learned AG has submitted that the area in question is admittedly reserve forest wherein the possession of the present nature is itself an offence. He has also submitted that sufficient time was granted by issuance of notice dated 21.07.2025 and only thereafter the action for removing the encroachment was taken. He has otherwise submitted that the aspect of compensation would not arise at all inasmuch as the petitioner was an illegal occupation for a long period of time which itself is an offence punishable under the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. After hearing the rival submissions, this Court is of the opinion that there is no dispute to the fact that there was illegal encroachment on forest area. The petitioner has categorically admitted that the area in question is within the Rengma Reserve Forest. Without even going to the aspect as to whether such possession is a punishable offence, the nature of relief which has been prayed for would require a factual determination which is not within the realm of an adjudication process Page No.# 5/5 by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no relief can be granted in this proceeding and accordingly the same is dismissed. It is however observed that the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of grievances. JUDGE Comparing Assistant