Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26339 (GAU)

RABIYAL SHEIKH AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

WP(C)/6022/2025 · 2025-12-02

Rajesh Mazumdar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010230122025 2025:GAU-AS:16582 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6022/2025 RABIYAL SHEIKH AND ANR SON OF LT JABBAR SHEIKH @ JOBBAR ALI SHEIKH, VILL- HATIPOTA PART-I, P.O. AND P.S.-CHAPAR, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783347 2: KHALIL SHEIKH SON OF LT JABBAR SHEIKH @ JOBBAR ALI SHEIKH VILL- HATIPOTA PART-I P.O. AND P.S.-CHAPAR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78334 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, LAND AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHUBRI ASSAM P.O. AND P.S. AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER CUM THE ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER CHAPAR REVENUE CIRCLE CHAPAR P.O. AND P.S.- CHAPAR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78334 Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN, MR A.K. MOLLAH,MR. R I MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 03.12.2025 Heard Mr. M. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H. Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam representing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department representing the respondent No. 1. The prayer made in the writ petition was for setting aside and quashing the impugned record of Govt./Khas land in respect of land measuring 8 Bighas 12 Lessas covered by Khatain No. 42, Dag No. 134(old)/142(new) of village Hatipota Part-II under Chapar Revenue Circle and for a direction to the respondent No. 3 to restore the patta in terms of the Khatain No. 42, Dag No. 134 (old)/142(new) of Village Hatipota Part-II and mutated the names of the petitioners against the aforesaid land. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that several applications have been filed before the Circle Officer in the later part of the year 2023 and also in the early part of the year 2024. An application had also been submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri, Assam on 08.09.2025. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel submits that the said application has not been processed by the concerned authorities and therefore, this writ petition had been filed by the petitioners. Today, a communication dated 15.10.2025 issued by the District Commissioner of Dhubri, Land Settlement Branch to the Circle Officer, Chapar Revenue Circle, Chapar has been placed before this Court, by which the District Commissioner has required Page No.# 3/3 the Circle Officer, to look into the prayer petition submitted by the petitioners and to take necessary action as per rule. Mr. H. Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam representing the respondent has submitted that in case, the Circle Officer has not disposed of the prayer petition of the petitioners, necessary directions may be issued requiring the Circle Officer to dispose of the prayer petition in accordance with law. In case the prayer petition has already been disposed of, the petitioners are required to be informed about the result of the said prayer petition. Accordingly, this Court directs the Circle Officer, Chapar Revenue Circle to dispose of the prayer petition submitted by the petitioners, which is also referred to in the communication dated 15.10.2025, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. In case, the prayer petition of the petitioners has already been disposed of, the Circle Officer, Chapar Revenue Circle, shall inform the result thereof to the petitioners when the petitioners approaches the Circle Officer along with the certified copy of this order. Writ petition is disposed of. This disposal shall not preclude the petitioners for availing such remedies in law against any rejection of their prayer. No costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant