Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010049682017 2025:GAU-AS:3200 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6982/2017 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK and ANR. A BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING "COMPANIES" ACQUISITION AND THE TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS ACT 1970, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT 7 BHIKHAIJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI. 2: THE AUTHORISED OFFICER PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK BHANGAGARH BRANCH 1ST FLOOR NILGIRI MANSION G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI-781005 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 5 ORS. THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPTT., GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI. 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M GUWAHATI ASSAM. 3:CIRCLE OFFICER SONAPUR REVENUE CIRCLE GUWAHATI. 4:MAJOR SURAIT BARMAN S/O. DHARMESWAR BARMAN HOUSE NO. 211 R.G. BARUAH ROAD NEAR AIDC Page No.# 2/4 GUWAHATI ASSAM-781024. 5:SMT. DEEPIKA DEKA W/O. DILIP KUMAR KALITA FLAT NO. 5B SUBHAM CLASSIC AMBIKAGIRI NAGAR P.O. ZOO ROAD GUWAHATI KAMRUP M PIN-781024 ASSAM. 6:BHABATOSH KR. ROY S/O. NISHI KANTA ROY AMAR PATH GITANAGAR HOUSE NO. 16 GUWAHATI ASSAM-781024 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A GANGULY, MR.A DUTTA,MR.A DHANUKA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR P S DEKA, SC, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,MR. M A SHEIKH(R- 6,7&8),MS.A BEGUM(R- 6,7&8),MS.F INTAZ(R- 6,7&8),MD.M H CHOUDHURY(R- 6,7&8),MR A K RAI (R4-R6),MS. N RAI (R4-R6) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 24.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. A Ganguly, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. N Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue Department representing the respondent No. 1 and Ms. S Baruah, learned State counsel representing the respondent Nos. 2 & 3. 2. Punjab National Bank (Bank) as secured creditor obtained order from the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati for recovery of the Page No.# 3/4 certificate amount which was defaulted by the borrowers. The properties mortgaged by the borrowers were thereafter put to auction sale on 20.06.2016. In the auction sale, respondent Nos.4 to 6 purchased the auctioned land at a considerable amount. According to the said respondents, they had purchased the land on auction sale after obtaining bank loan. 3. After auction sale was concluded, possession of the mortgaged land which was so sold could not be handed over to the purchasers on the ground that the land was not properly demarcated. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Gangully, learned counsel for the petitioners that so far relating to auction sale and handing over of the auction property to the auction purchaser, there is no live issues as on today, however, the District Administration has failed to demarcate the land under equitable mortgage even after repeated request of the petitioners. 5. Ms. N Bordoloi, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department representing the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Ms. S Baruah, learned state counsel representing the respondent Nos.2 & 3 submitted that in terms of determination made in Riju Prasad Sarma Vs. State of Assam & Ors reported in 2022 6 GaulR 111, this writ petition is not maintainable so far the same relates to direction for demarcation inasmuch as, it was held in Riju Prasad Sarma (supra) that a writ petition is not maintainable raising a claim or dispute of demarcation, the same being a notified service and Page No.# 4/4 there being efficacious alternative remedy under ARTPS Act, 2012. 6. At this stage, Mr. Gangully, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the bank may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition and to approach the designated public servant seeking demarcation of the land in terms of the ARTPS Act, 2012 and the rules framed there under. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition stands closed on withdrawal with liberty as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant