Page No.# 1/10 GAHC010201102025 2025:GAU- AS:12342-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : PIL/39/2025 ALL ASOM GORIYA YUVA CHATRA PARISAD HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT DWARAKA NAGAR, HOUSE NO.7, GUWAHATI-22, THROUGH ITS JOINT SECRETARY IBRAHIM ALI, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O RASHID ALI, R/O HENGERABARI, LICHUBAGAN, P/O- HENGERABARI, P.S.-DISPUR, DIST.-KAMRUP (M), ASSAM- 781036 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS. TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE DEPARTMENT 4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE O/O THE PCCF AND HOFF ASSAM ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI Page No.# 2/10 GUWAHATI-37 5:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER GUWAHATI WILDLIFE DIVISION GUWAHATI 6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER GOLAGHAT WILDLIFE DIVISION GOLAGHAT 7:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 8:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM WELFARE OF MINORITIES AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI - 06 9:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN GUWAHATI-06 10:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS JANATA BHAWAN GUWAHATI- 06 11:THE DIRECTOR OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM-06 12:THE COMMISSIONER GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GANESH MANDIR GUWAHATI-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, S LASKAR,MR M KHAN,MR S ABDULLAH,MR N A MAZARBHUIYA,MR N Z CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, W M D,SC, GMC,SC, P AND R.D.,SC, FOREST Page No.# 3/10 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 10/09/2025 (Michael Zothankhuma, J) 1. Heard Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Mr. R. Borpujari, learned counsel appearing for the State; Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing for the Forest Department, Assam; Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Assam and Ms. M.D.Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Welfare of Minorities and Development Department, Assam. 2. The petitioner’s case is that the State respondents have illegally demolished the houses of the members of the petitioner’s association who belong to the indigenous Assamese Muslim Community in the State of Assam, even though the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Assam, in his speech published in newspapers on 02/08/2025, had stated that the State would not consider unauthorized occupation of public land by indigenous people as an encroachment. However, the State has not acted upon the decision of the Hon’ble Chief Minister and they have targeted the indigenous Muslim community of the State of Assam, by issuing them 7 (seven) days notice, for eviction from the Rengma Reserve Forest area under Uriamghat Regional Forest Office, for violating Regulation 24 and 25 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891, which are as follows:- “24. Penalties for trespass or damage in reserved forests-Any person who in a reserved forest- (a) trespasses, or pastures cattle, or permits cattle to trespass, or Page No.# 4/10 (b) causes any damage by negligence in felling any tree or cutting or dragging any timber, '[*****] [(c) ***** [Shall be punished with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with both, or when the damage resulting from his offence amounts to more than one thousand rupees, with fine which is not less than five thousand rupees or with imprisonment which is not less than one year but may extend to three years or with both.] 25. Acts prohibited in such forests- Any person who,- (a) makes any fresh clearing prohibited by Section 7, or (b) sets fire to a reserved forest, or, in contravention of any rules by the State Government kindles any fire, or leaves any fire burning, in such manner as to endanger such forest, or who, in any such forest, or Who, in any such forest, (c) kindles, keeps or carries any fire except at such seasons and in such manner as a forest- officer specially empowered in this behalf may from time to time notify, or (d) fells, cuts, girdles, marks, lops, taps, or injures by fire or otherwise any tree, or Page No.# 5/10 (e) quarries stone, burns lime or charcoal, or collects. subjects to any manufacturing process or removes any forest-produce, or (f) clears or breaks up any land for cultivation or any other purpose, or [(g)poisons water or, in contravention of any rules made by the State Government, hunts, shoots, fishes or sets traps or snares,] "Shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which is not less than one year but may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both."]” 3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that while some of the houses of the members of petitioner’s association had been demolished after issuance of the notices, some of the houses of the members of the petitioner’s association have not yet been demolished. He also submits that the houses of similarly placed persons, who belong to other religious groups and who have also encroached upon Rengma Reserve Forest area, has not been touched by the State Government. He also submits that in the case of In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of Structures [2024 SCC OnLine SC 3291], the Hon’ble Supreme Court had issued directions to be followed by the State, prior to any demolition being carried out by the State against unauthorized structures. He submits that in terms of the above directions, a show cause notice of 15 (fifteen) days was to be provided by the authorities, containing various details specified in para 91 of the said judgement and a personal hearing was also to be given to the effected individual. It was only after the above steps were undertaken by the authorities that the State could take the extreme step of demolition of an unauthorized structure of a citizen. However, in the present case, the above directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court had been given a go-bye. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in a similar matter Page No.# 6/10 pertaining to the question of encroachment of forest land pertaining to the same Rengma Forest and South Nambhor Reserve Forest, in the district of Golaghat, the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 18/08/2025 passed in WA 251/2025 (Abdul Khalek and 58 others Vs. State of Assam and others), had directed that if there is a drive undertaken for clearing reserve forest land of encroachment and if it was found that there was some unauthorized settlers, they ought to be given a reasonable time of 15 (fifteen) days to explain under what circumstances they had set up their residence inside the reserved forest area, where any non-forest activity or their presence attracts penal offence. It also directed that besides the notice period of 15 days, a further 15(fifteen) days time would have to be given to encroachers, to leave the reserve forest land. He accordingly submits that a similar direction should be passed by this Court. 5. The learned Advocate General, Assam, submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable on account of the petitioner not being a registered association. In this regard, he has relied upon the judgement of the Division Bench in the case of Meghalaya Wine Dealers Association and Anr. Vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors. [(2010)5 GLR 332], wherein, it has been held that an association cannot file a writ petition, unless it entertains the character of a juristic person or a legal person, by registering under a statute. 6. The learned Advocate General further submits that as the members of the petitioner’s association are encroachers in the reserve forest carrying out non-forest activity, they are liable to be prosecuted under Regulation 24 & 25 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. He also submits that for those persons whose houses have been demolished, they always have a right to go to the Civil Court for damages, if they had been evicted illegally. He submits that no discrimination has been made in evicting encroachers from various forest and Government land, on the basis of caste, religion or community. He submits that persons belonging to other religions, besides the Muslim religion, have also been evicted from encroached forest / Government land. Page No.# 7/10 7. The learned Advocate General further submits that the Chief Minister of Assam has not made any statement that unauthorized occupation of public land by indigenous people of a particular religion would not be considered as encroachment. The learned AG further submits that concession given by him in the order dated 18/08/2025 passed in WA 251/2025 would also be applicable in this case. 8. Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Addl. A.G. appearing for the Forest Department submits that the decision cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner, i.e. In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of Structures (Supra), is not applicable to the facts of this case, as the present case pertains to encroachment of reserved forest land, while the above case is with regard to demolition of properties of persons accused of committing criminal offences, without following the due process. 9. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 10. Though the petitioner’s counsel has stated that the members of the petitioner’s association should not be evicted from their land on account of the statement made by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Assam that they would not be considered to be encroachers, we are of the view that there can be no protection given to a person encroaching upon forest/Government land, be it a person professing any faith. The law has to be applied equally to everybody and in the event a member of the petitioner association is found to be encroaching upon forest land in violation of Assam Forest Regulation, 1891, the eviction of such encroacher would be justified. The question that is to be seen is to whether the 7(seven) days time period given in the show cause notice issued to the members of the petitioner association, was sufficient time for the members of the said association to make a reply to the said notice. 11. In the case of In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of Structures (Supra), the Supreme Court had directed that prior to demolition of a property belonging to persons who had been accused of committing criminal offences, Page No.# 8/10 15 (fifteen) days notice was to be given upon the owner/occupier of the unauthorized structure. The notice was to contain the nature of the unauthorized construction and details of specific violation and grounds of demolition. A personal hearing was also to be provided to the owner / occupier of the unauthorized structure and only after the said steps had been undertaken, the extreme step of demolition was to be carried out by the authorities. The guidelines made by the Supreme Court prior to demolition of an unauthorized structure pertains to residential and commercial properties, whose owners are accused of committing criminal offences. In para 12 of the said judgement, it has been clearly stated by the Supreme Court that the scope of the case was limited and that the question that would have to be considered, was as to whether the properties of the persons, who are accused of committing certain crimes or for that matter even convicted for commission of criminal offences, can be demolished without following the due process of law or not. 12. The issue of eviction in the present case is with respect to encroachment and the unauthorized structures built within the reserved forest area. It has nothing to do with persons having any criminal cases against them. Be that as it may, in a similar case pertaining to the same reserve forest, a Coordinate Bench had, vide order dated 18/08/2025 disposed of WA 251/2025, by holding that if a drive for clearing reserve forest areas of all encroachment was undertaken and if it was found that there was some unauthorized settlers, they ought to be given a reasonable time of 15 days to explain under what circumstances they had set up their residence inside the forest area, where any non-forest activity or their presence attracted penal offence. They were then to be given a further period of 15 (fifteen) days thereafter, for exiting/vacating the place, if they were found to be encroachers. The Co-ordinate Bench further held that the same would, however, not protect the encroachers from being prosecuted for any offence committed by them for carrying out non-forest activity inside the reserve forest area under Regulation 24 & 25 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. Page No.# 9/10 13. Para 21 to 24 of the order dated 18.08.2025, passed in W.A.No.251/2025 are reproduced herein below as follows:- “21. We would also like to observe that henceforth, if such drive is undertaken for clearing the reserved forest area of all encroachments and if it is found that there are some settlers, even though unauthorized, they ought to be given a reasonable period of time of 15 days, to explain under what circumstances they had set up their residence inside the reserved forest area where any non- forest activity or their presence attracts penal offence, and a further period of 15 days, for exiting the place on being asked to do so. 22. 22. Notwithstanding the fact that no procedure has been delineated, it would be only in the interest of justice that a notice of 15 days and a further time of 15 days be given to such squatters/encroachers to leave the reserved forest area. 23. The learned Advocate General has raised no objection to such observation and submitted that efforts would be made to put such procedure in place for any future eviction drive. 24. However, this would not protect the encroachers from being prosecuted for the penal offence committed by them in carrying out non-forest activity in the reserved forest area under Regulation 24 and 25 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891.” 14. On considering the fact that the petitioner is an unregistered association, we are of the view that the PIL is not maintainable, in terms of the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Meghalaya Wine Dealers Association & Anr. (Supra). However, the issue of encroachment being relatable to individuals, the individual members have the liberty to raise their grievance regarding violation of any of their rights in any appropriate forum, if they feel that an illegal action is being taken against them. Page No.# 10/10 15. Notwithstanding the fact that we find that the present PIL is not maintainable, we are of the view that as a similar issue had been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.A. No.251/2025, the directions passed in that case can also be applied to unauthorized settlers/encroachers, who are to be driven out from reserved forest areas, after they are given a show-cause-notice of 15(fifteen) days, to enable them to explain the circumstances under which they have set up their residences inside the reserved forest area and whether any non-forest activities or their presence attracts penal offences under the applicable laws. Thereafter, if the State respondents are of the view that those persons are encroachers, a further 15(fifteen) days time should be given to those encroachers to leave the reserved forest. Thereafter, the State Government would be justified in taking steps for evicting the encroachers. 16. With the above observations and directions, the PIL is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant