Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010012982025 2025:GAU-AS:2197 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/393/2025 MD. GAFUR ALI AHMED SON OF LATE RAHMAN ALI, VILLAGE- KHUDRA SINADI (SANAPUR), POLICE STATION- MUKALMUA, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSAM 3:ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BARPETA DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSAM 4:CIRCLE OFFICER SARTHEBARI REVENUE CIRCLE DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S RANA, MR. M K MISRA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 03.03.2024 Heard Mr. M.K. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. A. Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 1; and Mr. N. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4. 2. The petitioner had approached this Court with the projection that in respect of a plot of land, measuring 1 Bigha 1 Katha, covered by Dag no. 188 & Patta no. 74, situate at Village – Chinadi Pathar, Lot no. 2, Mouza – Sarthebari [‘the subject-plot’], the petitioner claimed that he along with his brothers had been enjoying the ownership and possession by virtue of inheritance. When a dispute arose, a proceeding was initiated under Sections 107/145/146, CrPC by the respondent no. 3 vide Case no. 86/2023. After hearing the parties; and also upon perusal of the records and reports received from the concerned revenue staff, the respondent no. 3 had passed an Order on 06.11.2024 [Annexure-9 to the writ petition] directing the respondent no. 4 to deliver khas possession of the subject-plot to the petitioner. As the respondent no. 4 had not acted upon the said Order dated 06.11.2024 despite the Order dated 06.11.2024 being brought to his knowledge, the petitioner had to approach this Court by the writ petition. 2. When the writ petition was moved on 10.02.2025, the learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam was asked to obtain instructions from the respondent no. 4 as regards compliance or otherwise of the Order dated 06.11.2024. 3. Mr. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam on the basis of instructions received by him from the respondent no. 4, has submitted that the direction given in the Order dated 06.11.2024 has since been complied with. 4. Mr. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted, on the basis of Page No.# 3/3 instruction received from the petitioner, that the direction given in the Order dated 06.11.2024 has been complied with by handing over the possession of the subject-plot to the petitioner. 5. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties in the afore-stated manner that the direction given in the Order dated 06.11.2024 has been complied with, there is no cause of action survives in the writ petition for adjudication. The writ petition is accordingly closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant