Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010254282023 2025:GAU-AS:12270 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6497/2023 THE GLOBAL MODERN ACADEMY AND ANR REP BY ITS SECRETARY BUDDHA BASUMATARY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS S/O LT THUNTRA BASUMATARY R/O BIJNI TOWN WARD NO. 3 AMGURI P.O. BIJNI DIST. CHIRANG BTR ASSAM 2: THE PRINCIPAL GLOBAL MODERN ACADEMY REP BY SRI PRABIN BASUMAARY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O LT BANIJ BASUMATRA R/O BIJNI TOWN WARD NO. 3 AMGURI P.O. BIJNI DIST. CHIRANG BTR ASSA VERSUS THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL AND 8 ORS REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BODOLAND SECRETARIAT COMPLEX BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 783370 2:THE SECRETARY EDUCATION BODOLAND SECRETARIAT COMPLEX BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 783370 3:THE SECRETARY LAND REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT BODOLAND SECRETARIAT COMPLEX BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 783370 4:JOINT SECRETARY LAND REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT BODOLAND SECRETARIAT COMPLEX BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 783370 5:THE DIRECTOR EDUCATION BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 783370 6:THE LAND ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page No.# 2/7 BIJNI DIST. CHIRANG BTR ASSAM 783390 7:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BIJNI DISTRICT CIRCLE BIJNI BTR ASSAM PIN 783390 8:CIRCLE OFFICER BIJNI REVENUE CIRCLE BIJNI DIST CHIRANG BTR ASSAM PIN 783390 9:THE PRESIDENT BATHOU ASHRAM COMMUNITY HAINA NWGWR BIJNI TOWN WARD NO. 3 AMGURI P.O. BIJNI DIST. CHIRANG ASSAM PIN 78339 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R DHAR, MR J PAYENG,MR B C MUCHAHARY,MRS. A BASUMATARY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, BTC, MR F U BARBHUIYA(R-9),MS S DAS(R-9),MR H R A CHOUDHURY (R-9) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 04-09-2025 Heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.K. Musahary, learned standing counsel, BTC and Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 9. 2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present proceeding has presented a challenge to a communication dated 29-09-2022 by which a plot of land measuring 1B-3K-10L was allotted to the respondent No. 9, herein. 3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner No. 1 is a Non-Governmental Institution and is involved in imparting education to the children from Class- I to X. It is projected that Page No.# 3/7 earlier a school in the name and style of Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School was being operated, however, the school having become defunct, a new school was established in the name and style “Global Modern Academy”, i.e. the petitioner No. 1, herein. 4. It is projected that the competent authority had proposed for allotment of a land measuring 01B-03K-10L covered by Dag No. 1039 (VGR) of Bijni Town in the name of Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School, subject to approval of the de-reservation proposal by the Government. The Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School having become defunct, it is projected that the President of the said school signed a declaration on 15-08-2011 by which it was authorised to establish and run a new private school under the name and style “Global Modern Academy”, Bijni, from the plot of land and building which was previously allotted in the name of Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School. It is projected that in terms of the said permission granted by the authorities of the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School, the petitioner No. 1/ School was set up on 05-09-2011. It is also projected that after setting up of the school, the authorities of the Bijni Town Committee had issued a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for procuring electricity connection to the building wherein the school was to function. Thereafter, the school was permitted to register students of Class-IX as per norms of Board of Secondary Education, Assam (SEBA) through Bijni Bandhab H.S. School. The petitioner No. 1/ School also projects that it had also applied for permission under the Non-Government Educational Institution (Regulation & Management) Act, 2006 and Rules 2007. The competent authority had thereafter permitted the petitioner No. 1/ School to register students till Class- XI through the Bijni Bandhab H.S. School. 5. In the above premises, it is projected that the petitioner No. 1/ School is being operated from the land earlier allotted to the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School in Dag No. 1039. Page No.# 4/7 Poised thus, the petitioners came across a communication dated 29-09-2022 by which the Bodoland Territorial Council, had ordered for allotment of land measuring 01B-03K-10L covered by VGR Dag No. 1039 of Bijni Town to the respondent No. 9, herein. 6. Being aggrieved, the petitioners have instituted the present proceeding. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 8. The materials brought on record reveals that the land in question from wherein the petitioner No. 1/ School is projected to be in operation was initially approved for allotment by the jurisdictional Land Advisory Committee, in favour of the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School. A total of 01B-03K-10L was approved for the said purpose. However, the land covered by Dag No. 1039 being a VGR land, such allotment was subject to approval of the de-reservation proposal by the Government. As noticed here-in-above, the said School having become defunct, the petitioner School herein was set up from the said premises. The petitioners have projected that the petitioner No. 1/ School was permitted to be operated from the land allotted earlier to Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School, by the authorities of the said School as well as in terms of the resolution adopted in a public meeting. The said position, however, is disputed by the respondent No. 9. The respondent No. 9, in its affidavit contended that the premises of Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School was permitted to be utilised for operation of the petitioner No. 1/ School in pursuance to a lease executed in the matter between the petitioner No. 1/ School and Haina Nwgwr Society on 15-12-2011. The execution of the said lease deed dated 15-12-2011 is not disputed by the petitioner, herein, however, in the rejoinder filed to the affidavit so filed by the respondent No. 9, the petitioners have Page No.# 5/7 contended that they were misled in executing the said lease deed by the respondent No. 9. However, as to how the petitioners were misled have not been disclosed. The petitioners have further projected that the land in question measuring 01B-03K-10L covered by Dag No. 1039 (VGR) being a Government Khas land and approved for allotment in favour of Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School, the said land could not have been rented out by way of execution of a lease deed. 9. The materials brought on record would go to reveal that it is disputed as to the manner in which the said petitioner No. 1/ School came to start its operation from the land earlier allotted in favour of the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School. The respondents have contended that both the petitioner No. 1/ School as well as the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School are two different and distinct educational institutions. It also having come on record that the petitioner No. 1/ School was being operated from the land earlier allotted in favour of the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School by way of execution of a lease deed dated 15-12-2011, this Court notices that the petitioner No. 1/ School has got no allotment in its favour and was a tenant only. It is different issue as to whether the Haina Nwgwr Society could have executed a lease deed with the petitioner for the land earlier allotted to Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School. It under the above circumstances that the respondent authorities on a due and proper consideration of the matter proceeded to issue a communication dated 29-09-2022 allotting the land measuring 01B-03K-10L covered by VGR Dag No. 1039 in Bijni Town to the respondent No. 9, herein. In the said communication it was also incorporated that earlier the allotment of land in favour of the Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School was approved by the jurisdictional Land Advisory Committee, in its meeting held on 15-05-1997. However, the land was now proposed to be allotted in the name of respondent No. 9 instead of Bijni Town Page No.# 6/7 Swrang M.E. School after the renaming of the institution as per Circle Officer’s report. Further the report of the Lat Mandal submitted to the Circle Officer, Bijni, brings to the forefront that the land now allotted to the respondent No. 9 was rented to the petitioner No. 1/ School and the plot of land was not possessed by the respondent No. 9. The said report was forwarded by the Circle Officer, Bijni Revenue Circle to the BTC authority vide communication dated 11- 07-2023, wherein the fact of the petitioner No. 1/ School being rented the plot of land involved by the respondent No. 9, was again incorporated. 10. The facts as noticed hereinabove, reveals that the land in question is a VGR land and it is not permissible to allot the said VGR land to any individual. However, the same is permissible to be so allotted in favour of a public institution. The respondent No. 9, herein, is a public institution and accordingly, the respondent authority, in their wisdom had issued the impugned communication dated 29-09-2022 allotting the plot of land, in question, in favour of the respondent No. 9, in place of the earlier Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School. This Court does not find any error in the said allotment made in favour of the respondent No. 9. This Court has noticed that the petitioner, herein, admittedly having occupied the said plot of land in pursuance to the lease deed executed with it by the society involved in operating the erstwhile Bijni Town Swrang M.E. School, finds that no right of the petitioners came to be violated on issuance of the impugned communication dated 29-09-2022. Further the contention raised by the parties to the proceedings brings on record disputed questions of fact, which this Court would not be in a position to resolve by only referring to the affidavits filed by the parties to the proceeding. 11. In view of the above position, this Court is of the view that no illegality was committed by the respondent authorities in issuing the communication dated 29-09-2022 allotting the Page No.# 7/7 plot of land measuring 01B-03K-10L covered by Dag No. 1039 (VGR) in favour of the respondent No. 9, herein. No right of the petitioners have been found to have been infringed on account of the allotment of the land in question in favour of the respondent No. 9, herein. 12. In view of the above discussions, this Court is of the considered view that present writ petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. However, there would be no order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant