Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010061442025 2025:GAU-AS:3853-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : PIL/20/2025 PRANAB KUMAR CHOUDHURY S/O LATE SIDDHI NATH KALITA, RESIDENT OF KUMARPARA, BHARULUMUKH, GUWAHATI-781009, DISTRICT OF KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS 1: THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, GUWAHATI, DISPUR, ASSAM. 2:THE MEMBER SECRETARY POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ASSAM BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM 4:THE COMMISSIONER JORHAT MUNCIPAL BOARD ASSAM 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER JORHAT ASSAM-3 6:THE GENERAL MANAGER NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHAT For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Das, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. G. Acharjee and Mr. N. Choudhury, Advocates. For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. S. Sarma, Junior Government Advocate, Assam for respondent Nos.1 & 5. : Mr. I. Borthakur, Standing Counsel, Environment & Forest Department for respondent No.3. : Mr. H. Gupta, Central Government Counsel for respondent No.6. Page No.# 2/4 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR 02.04.2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ) This PIL petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:- “In the premise aforesaid, Your humble petitioner prays that Your Lordship may be pleased to admit the present application, call for the records and issue a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why appropriate writ, direction or orders should not be issued to the respondent authorities directing them to: (I) to stop any kind of activities that would destroy the two ponds being nearly 100 years old and preserve the same for storing of excess water during rainy season thereby controlling flood in the area; (ii) to protect the water bodies primarily for maintaining the ecological balance in the area; (iii) maintain the banks of the ponds for use as strolling area by the public and the children; (iv) maintain the ponds for attracting the migratory birds of different varieties which uses the ponds and surrounding areas for breeding and resting ground; (v) maintain the two ponds from all encroachment by way of earth filling and any kind of constructions; (vi) issue direction that the two ponds be cleaned for public utility and for beautification in the area; and after cause or causes being shown and after hearing the parties be pleased to make the rule absolute and/or pass such further or other order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.” The claim of the petitioner is to the effect that 2(two) ponds near the Railway Station, Jorhat are in existence since last 100 years. However, the Railway Authorities has encroached over the said lands, where the old ponds Page No.# 3/4 were in existence, without any authority and are extending the Railway Station by filling the said ponds with sand and other material. Earlier also, the petitioner had preferred a PIL petition, being PIL No.9/2025, seeking the same reliefs. At the time of consideration of PIL No.9/2025, this Court asked the counsel for the petitioner to satisfy that the land, which is allegedly being used by the Railway Authorities for extension of the Railway Station, is recorded as a pond in the revenue record. At that stage, learned senior counsel appearing for the PIL petitioner in PIL No.9/2025 sought withdrawal of the PIL petition with liberty to file a fresh petition by supplying better particulars. Accordingly, the said PIL petition was dismissed on withdrawal with liberty to file a fresh PIL petition with better particulars, while complying with the mandatory Rules framed by this Court in respect of PILs. In this fresh PIL petition also, no such particulars has been placed on record establishing that the land which is allegedly being encroached by the Railway Authorities for the purpose of extension of the Railway Station, has been recorded in the revenue record as a pond. No other material has also been placed on record by the petitioner to substantiate the claim that the land allegedly encroached by the Railway Authorities for the purpose of extension of the Railway Station is the land where the above-referred ponds were in existence. In such circumstances, we are of the view that since the petitioner has failed to satisfy this Court that the land, which is allegedly being encroached by the Railway Authorities for the purpose of extension of the Railway Station, is the land where the old ponds were in existence, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this PIL petition. Page No.# 4/4 The petitioner has relied upon an information supplied to one Raj Kamal Kalita by the Circle Officer, East Jorhat Revenue Circle Office, wherein it is mentioned that the land falling in Dag No.8126 and 7854 in Jorhat Town No.3, Mouza No.11 Block is not railway land but Government land and, therefore, if the petitioner desires so, he may move a representation before the District Commissioner, Jorhat within a period of 2(two) weeks from today for redressal of his grievances. It is expected that if such a representation is filed, the District Commissioner, Jorhat shall consider the said representation objectively. With these observations, the PIL petition stands closed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant