Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010260632017 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5067/2017 TRIDEEP KHANIKAR and 2 ORS. S/O. LT. BROJENDRA KR. KHANIKAR, R/O. GOHAIN TEKELA GAON, P.O. CHANDOI TEKELA, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM. 2: SANTANU SAIKIA S/O. LT. DURGESWAR SAIKIA R/O. GORAMUR DULIA GOAN P.O. JORHAT ENGINEERING COLLEGE P.S. JORHAT DIST. JORHAT ASSAM. 3: MOHARAM ALI S/O. MD. JUMON ALI R/O. MELENG TEA ESTATE HINDUBARI P.O. MELENG GRANT P.S. TEOK DIST. JORHAT ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 11 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY.-06. 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER JORHAT ASSAM. Page No.# 2/4 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE JORHAT ASSAM. 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER TEOK REVENUE CIRCLE JORHAT ASSAM. 5:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE TEOK POLICE STATION TEOK JORHAT ASSAM. 6:THE IN-CHARGE LAHDOIGARH POLICE OUT POST P.O. LAHODOIGARH JORHAT ASSAM. 7:ROHAN KURMI S/O. SRI SUKHNATH KURMI 8:AMUSH TANTI S/O. SRI SANATAN TANTI 9:RAJEN RAJOWAR S/O. LT. ARJUN RAJOWAR 10:SUNIL KALINDI S/O. SRI PRAHLAD KALINDI 11:MUKESH KALINDI S/O. LT. DURGESWAR KALINDI Page No.# 3/4 12:MONTU RAJOWAR S/O. SRI SAHADEV RAJOWAR. RESPONDENT NOS. 7 TO 12 ARE RESIDENT OF MELENG TEA ESTATE HINDUBARI DIVISION P.O. MELENG GRANT P.S. TEOK DIST. JORHAT ASSAM PIN-785635 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P TALUKDAR, MR.R PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent : , GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 01.12.2025 Heard Ms M. Boruah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. R. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department appearing for the respondent no.1 and Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. The prayer in the writ petition was for appropriate directions to the respondent authorities to give adequate and full protection of the cultivated tea garden to the petitioners, directions to make arrangements so that encroachers can be evicted from the cultivated tea garden and to take a pragmatic policy decision for adequate giving to the petition. Shri Gogoi, the learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate has submitted Page No.# 4/4 on basis of instructions that as many as 12 FIRs have been lodged regarding the attempts of different persons to illegally pluck the tea leaves from the garden of the petitioners and charge sheet had also been submitted against those persons who were found to have illegally entered and pluck tea leaves from the garden of the petitioners. It thus appears that appropriate action have been taken by the respondent authorities to cause investigation and place charge sheet before the appropriate forum for adjudication. In view of the above, this writ petition does not require further adjudication. The writ petition is accordingly closed. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to approach such forum of law or administration as may be required if any further grievance remains regarding their tea garden and attempted encroachments. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant