Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010218152024 2025:GAU-AS:652-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/10/2025 HABIBUR RAHMAN S/O- LATE MOSLEM UDDIN, R/O- VILL.- TINSUKIA, P.S.- JURIA, P.O.- TINSUKIA, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782124. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING (WATER) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782002. 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING (WATER) DEPARTMENT HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-36. 4:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING (WATER) DEPARTMENT ITACHALI NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782003. 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NAGAON DIVISION MOKHULI DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782003. 6:THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NAGAON ITACHALI DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782003. Page No.# 2/3 7:THE SECTIONAL OFFICER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SINGIA SECTION NAGAON MOKHULI ASSAM PIN- 782003. 8:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER JURIA DEVELOPMENT BLOCK DAGAON NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782124. 9:THE PRESIDENT TINSUKIA GAON PANCHAYAT DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782124 For the Appellant(s) : Mr. T.L. Choudhury, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Ms. S. Sarma, Government Advocate, Assam. : Mr. I. Borthakur, Standing Counsel, PHE. – BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 22.01.2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ) The present writ appeal is filed by the appellant/writ petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 09.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.6415/2023, whereby the writ petition preferred by appellant/writ petitioner was dismissed. 2. The appellant approached the Writ court with a grievance that the respondent authorities of the Public Health Engineering (PHE) Department and the President of the Tinsukia Gaon Panchayat in the district Nagaon have assured him for implementation of a new Piped Water Supply Scheme (PWSS) under “Jal Jeevan Mission” (JMM) on the land belonging to him. 3. It is the case of the appellant that he paid an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- to the respondent authorities for selecting his land and also demolished a dwelling house amounting to Rs.26,00,000/- but now the PHE authorities and other respondents, who Page No.# 3/3 have assured for implementation of the new Piped Water Supply Scheme on the land belonging to him, have chosen some other land for implementing the Scheme. 4. The appellant prayed before the Writ Court for issuance of a direction to the respondent authorities to implement the said Scheme on the land belonging to him only and also to reimburse him the amount in respect of the money paid by him and also for demolition of the house. 5. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties and having gone through the material available on record, has observed that the claim of the appellant is not supported by the enquiries carried out by the District Administration. The learned Single Judge has further observed that no cogent material is produced by the appellant to substantiate the claim that his land was ever selected for implementation of the concerned Scheme. 6. It was the admitted case of the appellant before the learned Single Judge that he was orally assured by the PHE authorities whereas the PHE authorities have denied the said claim of the appellant. 7. We are of the view that when the appellant has failed to substantiate his claim by producing cogent and reliable documentary or other evidence, the learned Single Judge has rightly refused to exercise extra-ordinary jurisdiction. Hence, no case for interference is made out and the writ appeal is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant