Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010272892025 2025:GAU-AS:17534 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7323/2025 SMTI. CHANDRAWATI BAWRI W/O- DIL BAHADUR CHETRY. R/O- MULLANG GAON, P.O.- LEDO, P.S.- MARGHERITA, DIST.- TINSUKIA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT , DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM 3:SMTI. LEENA KUMARI PAWE THE ADDL. DIST. COMMISIONER TINSUKIA ASSAM 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MARGHERITA REVENUE CIRCLE MARGHERITA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM. 5:MD. SHAHJAHAN KHAN S/O- BILAL KHAN Page No.# 2/4 R/O- VILL.- LEDO MULANG P.O.- LEDO P.S- MARGHERITA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN - 78618 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the petitioner (s) : Mr. R. Dhar, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Mr. K. Gogoi, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. R. Borpujari, SC, Revenue Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 17.12.2025 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : NA Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : Yes JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. R. Dhar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned Standing Counsel of the Revenue and Disaster Management Department of the Government of Assam as well as Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the District Administration. 2. The petitioner herein has challenged the order dated 01.04.2025 passed in Revenue Appeal No.7/2024 by the Additional District Commissioner Revenue, Tinsukia whereby the Page No.# 3/4 Appeal against the petitioner was allowed thereby setting aside the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 passed in Misc. Case No.18/2024 by the Circle Officer, Margherita Revenue Circle, Margherita. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 01.04.2025 is absolutely illegal and requires interference by this Court. 4. Per contra, Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned Standing Counsel of the Revenue and Disaster Management Department as well as Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the District Administration submitted that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy available under Regulation 147 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, and therefore, this Court may not entertain the instant writ petition. 5. Mr. R. Dhar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on the other hand submitted that the period of limitation for filing an Appeal thereagainst before the learned Assam Board of Revenue is three months and as the impugned order is dated 01.04.2025, the petitioner would not be able to file an Appeal taking into account that it is already barred by limitation. 6. It is the opinion of this Court that if the respondents herein Page No.# 4/4 raise the issue pertaining to entertainability of the instant writ petition on the ground that there is an alternative and efficacious remedy, this Court cannot relegate the petitioner to the statutory appellate forum unless and until an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to file the Appeal. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition therefore stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) This Court is not entertaining the instant writ petition in view of an alternative and efficacious remedy available in terms with Section 147 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886. (ii) Taking into account that this Court has relegated the petitioner to the learned Assam Board of Revenue, this Court observes that if an Appeal is prepared by the petitioner within a period of 30 days from today, the learned Assam Board of Revenue shall entertain the Appeal without insisting on the question of limitation. JUDGE Comparing Assistant