Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010010152024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/481/2024 1: M/S MAHAVIR SAW AND VENEER MILL AND 2 ORS A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT LANKA MOUZA, LANKAGAON, DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM AND IS REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI JAI KISHAN BAJAJ. 2: DEOKI NANDAN BAJAJ PARTNER OF M/S MAHAVIR SAW AND VENNER MILL S/O- LATE CHIRANJILAL BAJAJ R/O- N AREA P.O. LANKA DIST. HOJAI. 3: JAI KISHAN BAJAJ PARTNER OF M/S MAHAVIR SAW AND VENEER MILL S/O- LATE CHIRANJILAL BAJAJ R/O- N AREA P.O. LANKA DIST. HOJAI VERSUS 1: THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781005, ASSAM 2:PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781005 ASSAM 3:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HOJAI Page No.# 2/5 DIST. HOJAI ASSAM 4:CIRCLE OFFICER LANKA REVENUE CIRCLE DIST. HOJAI ASSAM 5:SUB-DIVISIONAL LAND ADVISORY COMMITTEE DIST. HOJAI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S P ROY, JYOTISH DAS,MS. V RAI,MS. P AGARWALA,MS P DEY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE O R D E R Date : 02.05.2025. Heard Mr. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. A. Bhattacharjya, learned standing counsel for the Revenue Department and Mr. J. Handique, learned State Counsel for the respondent Nos.3, 4 & 5. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have put to challenge the recommendation made by the Hojai District Land Advisory Committee, whereby the petitioner is directed to apply for settlement through the Vasundhara-II phase. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to settle the land measuring 14 Bighas 8 Lechas, covered by Dag No.970 of Annual Patta No.95, in the name of the petitioners, which is under Page No.# 3/5 the possession of the petitioners since last 40 years. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner No.1 is a registered partnership firm situated at Lanka under Lanka Mouza in Lankagaon Kissam, consisting of two partners, namely, the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.2 and are engaged in the business of saw mill and wood veneer since 1981. 4. It is contended that one Sri Nukul Chandra Goswami executed a power of attorney vide Deed No.129/1988, in favour of the petitioner No.2, clearly specifying to utilize, convert or dispose land measuring 14 Bighas 8 Lechas, covered by Dag No.970 of Annual Patta No.95, as per the requirement of the petitioners and thereafter, the actual possession of said land was taken and constructed the structures and establish a Saw & Veneer Mill in the year 1981 and continue to run their said industry. 5. The petitioners filed an application before the concerned authority of the area for conversion of the Annual Patta land measuring 10 Bighas 2 Kathas 4 Lechas of Annual Patta No.95, Dag No.970. However, the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, vide order dated 01.12.1994, held that the said land being land of annual patta lease and the possession is willfully and illegally transferred by the lease holder violating the lease condition of the land and therefore, the land is liable to be made Government land. Thereafter, the said land was converted as Government land. 6. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 01.12.1994, passed by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, the petitioners approached the Board of Revenue, Assam by filing application on 19.12.2008, under Section 151 of the Page No.# 4/5 Assam Land & Revenue Regulation, 1886. Thereafter, vide order dated 06.01.2009, remanded the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon for settlement of the said land in the name of the petitioners. Pursuant thereto, vide letter dated 27.09.2022, a proposal was sent to the Addl. Deputy Commissioner (Revenue), Nagaon, which was placed before the District Land Advisory Committee. Vide the impugned recommendation, the District Land Advisory Committee, Nagaon has suggested the petitioners to apply through the Vasundhara-II phase. 7. Mr. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the petitioners are in possession of the aforesaid plot of land since last 40 years and the Vasundhara-II would not apply for converted Government land, the recommendation/ suggestion to apply through Vasundhara-II is not tenable. Therefore, the authorities may be directed to settle the said land in the name of the petitioners. 8. Mr. J. Handique, learned State Counsel, referring to the affidavit-in- opposition filed on behalf of the respondent No.3 i.e. the Deputy Commissioner, Hojai submits that the stand of the respondents is clear that if the petitioners submit all the relevant documents of the Non Renewal (NR Case) process through which the said land was converted to Government land to the office of the District Commissioner, Hojai, it would forward afresh to the Government for necessary approval for settlement of the said land in the name of the petitioners as per the due procedure. 9. On such categorical stand of the respondents, Mr. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that the petitioners are ready to submit all the Page No.# 5/5 relevant records for settlement of the said land. 10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the categorical stand taken by the respondents, I am of the considered view that no determination is required to be made in the present proceedings, as the petitioner is agreeable for submission of all the relevant documents for consideration of settlement of the said land in the name of the petitioners and the respondents are willing to consider the same as per due procedure. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to submit all the relevant documents of the Non Renewal (NR Case) process for the land (which was converted into the Government land) for consideration and settlement in the name of the petitioners to the District Commissioner, Hojai, within a period of fifteen (15) days from today. In the event the petitioners submits the relevant documents, as directed here-in- above, the respondent authorities shall consider the case of the petitioners for settlement of the aforesaid land in the name of the petitioners, in accordance with the applicable Acts and Rules, within a period of four (4) months thereafter. 12. The writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant