Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010225262022 2026:GAU-AS:10106 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7084/2022 SIRAJUL HOQUE S/O. LT. SAHED ALI, VILL. AND P.O. DHANIA BHETI, P.S. BATADRAVA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782122. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECREETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPTT. (S), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER NAGAON DISTRICT NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782001. 3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DHING REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. AND P.S. DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782123 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. B Sinha Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. N Das Govt. Advocate, Assam Mr. PR Phukan, Standing Counsel Page No.# 2/3 Revenue Department B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 22.07.2026 Mr. B Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted an annual patta on the basis of an apprehension that the petitioner would be evicted and thereupon, other persons would be granted the settlement over the land, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2. This Court during the course of the hearing enquired as to whether any coercive steps have been taken against the petitioner in the meantime. Mr. B Sinha, the learned counsel submits that no such coercive steps has been taken and the petitioner intends to file appropriate application for conversion of the annual patta to periodic patta as per the Assam Land Policy, 2019. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner would not further pursue with the instant writ petition without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner, to again approach this Court, in the circumstance any steps for eviction is taken. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that withdrawal of the writ petition should not also affect the petitioner’s claim seeking conversion of the annual patta to periodic patta. Page No.# 3/3 4. Taking into account the above, the writ petition, therefore, stands closed on withdrawal. 5. It is observed that the withdrawal of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner to again approach this Court in the circumstance any steps for eviction is taken. 6. Further the withdrawal of the writ petition shall not affect the petitioner’s rights to seek conversion of the annual patta land to periodic patta, if so permissible under the law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant