Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010038272024 2025:GAU-AS:14639 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1223/2024 KHAGENDRA NATH TALUKDAR S/O- LATE AMULYA TALUKDAR, R/O- H.NO- 25, SONAI MIKIR PATH, UTTAR PRAGATI NAGAR, SATGAON, MOUZA- BELTOLA, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781171 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPTT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE GUWAHATI METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GMDA) REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI 781005 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER Page No.# 2/5 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN-781036 6:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN-781036 7:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. S ALOM, MR S J SHAMIM,MR. P DAIMARY,MR. P K DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, SC, U D D,SC, G M D A,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 29.10.2025 Heard Mr P K Deka, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms N Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 1; Mr H Sarma, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7; Mr S Bora, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the alleged illegal eviction carried out on his property and on the land on which his property stood. The petitioner came into possession of the plot of land in issue in this writ petition by way of a sale deed for possessory rights on the plot of land. The said Page No.# 3/5 deed remains unregistered. The petitioner, had, thereafter, constructed a two-storied building on the plot of land and the said plot of land has been assessed by the Gauhati Municipal Corporation for payment of tax with regard to the said building. The petitioner also had an electricity connection established to the said building. 3. An eviction drive was jointly carried out by the authorities of the Gauhati Metropolitan Development Authority, GMC and the revenue authorities on alleged encroachments upon Government land and against illegal structures being constructed on such land. Although the name of the petitioner did not figure in the encroachers’ list, which is annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition, the building constructed by the petitioner was also demolished and the petitioner and his family was evicted from the plot of land under their possession. The petitioner had, thereafter, made a representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) Assam, on 18.12.2023, wherein he had requested the Deputy Commissioner to take necessary steps for paying necessary compensation and also praying for rehabilitation of his family after conducting an enquiry and assessment in connection with the eviction drive carried out by Government authority upon his Patta land. When the representation of the writ petitioner had not been considered or disposed of by the authority, this present writ petition has been filed. 4. Mr P K Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the land over which he had possession was a Patta land and the building construction on the said part of land cannot be termed to be illegal or unauthorized in any manner since the Gauhati Municipal Corporation had already assessed the building for the purposes of tax and the Assam Power Distribution Company had also allowed a electrical connection to the said building on his making an application for the same. He further submits that when the name of the petitioner was not included in the list of encroachers, and he was not issued any notice prior to such eviction and demolition drive, the respondents had acted illegally to his disadvantage, and, therefore, appropriate directions may be issued by this Court to the respondents to compensate the petitioner and his family adequately for the Page No.# 4/5 illegal eviction and demolition carried out on his property. 5. Mr H Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7, at this juncture, has vehemently objected to the contentions made by Mr P K Deka. Mr Sarma has submitted that it is an admitted case of the petitioner that he has received the compensation of Rs. 10 lacs for demolition of the building, which compensation had been arrived at by the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, while considering the reclamation of the Silsako Beel. 6. A copy of the minutes of the meeting dated 7th of September, 2023, is placed before this Court and the learned counsel for the petitioner in all his fairness has not disputed receipt of Rs. 10 lacs as compensation for the demolition carried out. He, however, submits that the petitioner is entitled to more compensation than what has been given. 7. Mr S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the GMDA has submitted that a mere assessment order issued by the GMC or an electrical connection to a particular structure would not stand as evidence of the same being a legally authorized structure. 8. The learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that the land on which the petitioner claims to be in possession is Government land and the structure on it being an illegal structure was correctly and rightfully demolished and the petitioner was lawfully evicted. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties. 10. The prayers made in this writ petition are for directions to pay adequate compensation and for directions to the respondents to rehabilitate the petitioner and his family since they have been evicted and their only dwelling house has been demolished. In the opinion of this Court, the aforesaid prayers cannot be considered by a writ Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, this Court would direct the respondent No. 5 to take into account the representation filed by the petitioner on 18.12.2023, by claiming compensation and rehabilitation. Let the said Page No.# 5/5 representation be disposed of by the respondent No. 5 within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, along with a copy of this writ petition to be supplied by the petitioner to the respondent No. 5. 11. The petitioner would be at liberty to file additional representation along with the certified copy, at the same time. The petitioner would also be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum of law with his claim for compensation. 12. Writ petition is accordingly closed with the liberty to the petitioner as indicated above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant