Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010004172023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/152/2023 HADIQATUL ULOOM BASHAIL MUHAMMADIA SHAHIDIA MADRASSA PO- MARJATKANDI, PS- BADARPUR, KARIMGANJ, ASSAM REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SECRETARY ABDUN NOOR, S/O KHURSHID ALI, AGE- 71 YEARS, R/O- VILLAGE RONGPUR, P.S. AND P.O.- BADARPUR, DISTRICT- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PWD), GUWAHATI- 781006, DISPUR, ASSAM. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788710. 3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BADARPUR KARIMGANJ ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. P. SINGHA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD, GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 01.09.2025 Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitoner. Also heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, appearing for the respondent no.1 and Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent nos.2 & 3. 2. The grievance raised in the present proceedings by the petitioner pertains to the actions on the part of the respondent authorities in changing the alignment of a road which was apprehended to have the effect of demolishing the structure of the petitioner standing over the plot of land in question. 3. Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent nos.2 & 3, has today placed on record a instruction received by him from the District Commissioner, Sribhumi, vide communication dated 28.08.2025. 4. On perusal of the communication dated 28.08.2025, it is revealed that a joint field verification was carried out in the matter by the Circle Officer, Badarpur Revenue Circle, officials of the establishment of the Executive Engineer, PWD, Sribhumi, North Territorial Sub-Division, Sribhumi, and on such joint field verification being carried out on 17.07.2025, it had come on record that the structure/building of the petitioner standing over the plot of land in question, need not be demolished and only the demolishing of the Page No.# 3/4 boundary wall of the petitioner’s institution would be called for, inasmuch as the same was found to be falling within the Right of the Way(ROW) of the road under construction. It is to be noted that the said road is being constructed under the “Asom Mala” project. 5. The said communication further brings on record the fact that the building of the petitioner does not fall within the ROW and the carrying out of the construction of the work would in no way affect the said building of the petitioner. 6. In view of the said position, emanating in the matter, Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he would have no objections to the respondents demolishing the boundary wall of the petitioner’s property, if the same is required to be done, for the construction of the road under the “Asom Mala” project, however, he submits that the building of the petitioner now being contended to be not affected by the construction of the road on its re- alignment, the petitioner’s grievance in the present proceedings stands redressed. 7. Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, further submits that liberty be given to the petitioner to approach the respondent authorities, compensation for demolition of the boundary wall, as well as for land compensation, in the event, any portion of the land of the petitioner is required to be taken over for the construction of the road. 8. Prayer is not objected to by Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents. 9. In view of the above position, the building of the petitioner, Page No.# 4/4 now found to be not required to be demolished for construction of the road, in question, under the “Asom Mala” project, the basic grievance raised in the present petition by the petitioner’s stands redressed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities claiming compensation for the demolition of the wall, as well as for land compensation, in the event, any portion of the land of the petitioner’s is required to be utilized for construction of the road in question. 10. With the above observations and directions, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of. 11. The communication dated 28.08.2025, furnished by Mr. N. Goswami, is kept on record and marked as ‘X’ for the purpose of identification. JUDGE Comparing Assistant