Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010027422017 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3625/2017 BILKIS BEGUM @ BILKIS BAGAM W/O. SRI. ABDUS SALAM PRODHANI, R/O. VILL. BALAJAN P.S. GAURIPUR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 6 ORS. TO BE REP. BY THE COMM. and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE and D.M. DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER DHUBRI P.O. P.S. and DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 3:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER DHUBRI and KOKRAJHAR DISTRICT P.O. P.S. and DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 4:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER GOLAKGANJ REVENUE CIRCLE AT GOLAKGANJ P.O. and P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER Page No.# 2/4 GOLAKGANJ REVENUE CIRCLE AT GOLAKGANJ P.O. and P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 6:SRI ABDUL JOBBAR SARKAR S/O. LT. ALAUDDIN SARKAR R/O. GAURIPUR WARD NO. 4 P.O. and P.S. GAURIPUR DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783335. 7:SRI AUCHANTA KUMAR CHAKRABORTY S/O. LT. NANDA GOPAL CHAKRABORTY R/O. VILL. BALAJAN P.S. GAURIPUR DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783336 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.P BARMAN, MR.A A R KARIM,MR.A DEB Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 04.08.2025 Heard Shri AAR Karim, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri N Das, learned State Counsel, Assam as well as Ms. PR Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department, Assam. The grievance of the petitioner is against an order dated 05.06.2017 issued by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Golakganj Revenue Circle whereby, the petitioner was directed to demolish her three storied RCC building and other structure within 15 Page No.# 3/4 days. It is also the case of the petitioner that on the same subject matter, T.S. No. 442/2013 was pending before the Munsiff No. 1, Dhubri and in the said title suit, a misc. case was filed on 09.06.2017 in which, hearing was fixed on 23.06.2017. It, however appears that parallelly, the present writ petition was filed on 13.06.2017. This Court vide order dated 16.06.2017 had issued notice and had also passed an interim order of stay of the impugned order dated 05.06.2017 till the next date fixed. Shri Karim, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for a long period of time, he is not in touch with the client and does not have the present instructions. He has, however submitted that as regards the step upon the respondent no. 6, he has taken such step today. Shri Das, learned State Counsel has, however submitted that on the same subject matter, the suit mentioned above, is pending. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Deputy Commissioner on 12.04.2017 in which, the fact of filing of the civil suit has been revealed. After consideration of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the subject matter of the present lis being a matter of fact which is disputed in nature and the said matter being before the competent civil court for adjudication, a parallel proceeding is not required to be continued. In view of the above, this writ petition is closed. In the event, the aforesaid title suit instituted in the year 2013 is still pending, the petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate application for injunction regarding the impugned cause of action which, otherwise also has become otiose. It is also provided that the competent authority may take appropriate action in accordance with law in respect of the plot of land in question. Page No.# 4/4 Interim order passed earlier stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant