Page No.# 1/11 GAHC010148622022 2026:GAU-AS:11097 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4987/2022 MASARAF ALI CHOUDHURY AND ANR. SON OF LATE ABDUL BARI CHOUDHURY, VILLAGE PANCHGRAM, POST OFFICE PANCHGRAM, 788802, DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM. 2: RANJIT SINGHA SON OF LATE NARENDRA SINGHA VILLAGE- PANCHGRAM POST OFFICE PANCHGRAM 788802 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 6. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI P.O. AND DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 4:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) HAILAKANDI DISTRICT P.O. AND DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 5:THE ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER Page No.# 2/11 ALGAPUR CIRCLE P.O. ALGAPUR DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER ALGAPUR REVENUE CIRCLE P.O.- ALGAPUR DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 7:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL LAND ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SAID COMMITTEE C/O- THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) : Mr. B Malakar Advocate for the respondent(s) : Ms. G Hazarika Standing Counsel Revenue and Disaster Management Department Mr. SS Roy, Govt. Advocate Assam Date on which Judgment is reserved: NA Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 07.08.2026 Page No.# 3/11 Whether the Pronouncement is of the : Yes Operative Part of the Judgment Whether the Full Judgment has been : No Pronounced JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. B Malakar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Ms. G Hazarika the learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and Mr. SS Roy, the learned Government Advocate, Assam. 2. This is the third round litigation filed by the petitioners seeking settlement of land. 3. The material facts relevant are that the petitioners along with 56 persons are members of an Association, namely, River Erosion Affected Persons Demand Committee, Panchgram, Hailakandi. The petitioners, along with the other flood and erosion affected persons, were in possession of a plot of land admeasuring 1 bigha 10 katha, covered by Dag No.433 under Mouza Panchgram, Hailakandi. A representation was submitted on 14.01.1991 before the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi praying for settlement of the said land to the petitioners and other members of the said association. The Land Page No.# 4/11 Advisory Committee, Hailakandi in the meeting held on 10.03.1993, decided to verify the cases of 4(four) flood and river erosion affected persons mentioned at serial Nos. a), c), d), i) of the Resolution No.5 of the said meeting. The other persons mentioned in the Resolution No.5 of the said meeting were not found to be river erosion affected persons. However, as no lands were allotted to the members of the Association of the petitioners, a writ petition was filed before this Court which was registered and numbered as CR No.736/1995, seeking direction upon the authorities for settlement of the aforesaid plot of land covered by Dag No.433 in the respective possession of the members of the said Association. 4. This Court vide the judgment and order dated 16.03.1999, directed the respondent authorities to examine the individual cases of the river and erosion affected persons and to take necessary action thereupon for settlement of the land in their respective possession within a period of 4(four) months from the date of receipt of the judgment and order dated 16.03.1999. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondents did not consider the case of the petitioners as well as the other river erosion affected persons, rather took steps for forceful eviction of the petitioners and other persons belonging to the Association. Page No.# 5/11 Resultantly, the Secretary of the Association wherein the petitioners are members filed a writ petition before this Court which was registered and numbered as WP(C)No.7994/2005. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 17.05.2007 with a direction to the respondent authorities to act in accordance with the judgment and order dated 16.03.1999, passed in CR No.736/1995. 6. The Assistant Settlement Officer, Algapur Circle, Hailakandi, by a letter dated 03.06.2008, informed the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi that allotment of land to River Erosion Affected persons has been re-examined, stating inter alia, that the River Erosion Affected Families at Panchgram, Hailakandi, are local residents and poor persons and have no alternative lands. Inspite of the said report being submitted by the Assistant Settlement Officer, the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi did not take any action, for which the petitioner filed another petition, which was registered and numbered as WP(C) No.4183/2008. In the said proceedings, the Assistant Settlement Officer submitted a detailed status report dated 06.06.2014 in respect to the Dag No.433, showing the respective possession of the 56 persons over the plot of land covered by Dag No. 433, who were members of the Association including the petitioners herein. It was also mentioned that the total land in Dag No. 433 is 6 bighas, 7 kathas, 1 chattak, and out of that some portion of the lands Page No.# 6/11 have been allotted to some other persons, and periodic pattas have been issued, and there still remained 5 bighas, 5 kathas and 1 chattak. In addition to that, it was mentioned in the report that an area of 1 bigha 10 kathas are in physical possession of the members of the Association wherein the petitioners were members. 7. This Court, taking into account the said report dated 06.06.2014 and other reports vide the order dated 23.07.2014 disposed of the said writ petition thereby directing the official respondents to complete the process of rehabilitation and grant of patta to flood- affected families after verification of the record within 3(three) months. 8. It is the further case of the petitioners that pursuant thereto, the Sub Divisional Land Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 28.05.2018, reduced the number of Flood and River Erosion Affected Families at Panchgram, in the Hailakandi district and also reduced the area of land in respective possession of the Flood and River Erosion Affected Families over the land covered by Dag No.433, that too, without hearing the petitioners. 9. It is under such circumstances, the petitioners approached this Court challenging the minutes of the meeting dated 28.05.2018 of the Page No.# 7/11 Sub Divisional Land Advisory Committee and further sought for a direction that the petitioners should be granted settlement in terms with the status report dated 06.06.2014 submitted by the Assistant Settlement Officer, which was placed before this Court. 10. The record reveals that this Court vide the order dated 03.08.2022 issued notice. An affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the respondent No.4 on 22.03.2024, wherein it was mentioned that out of the 56 members of the River Erosion Affected Persons Demand Committee Hailakandi, only 31 members were found to be in possession of the Government land under 2nd R.S. Dag No.433 (Pt.) of Mouza Panchgram, under Algapur Revenue Circle and accordingly the concerned Assistant Settlement Officer submitted proposal for allotment of land under the said Dag (as per their possession). The said proposal was placed before the Sub-Divisional Land Advisory Committee, Hailakandi in the meeting dated 28.05.2018 and the SDLAC recommended the said proposal vide Resolution No.1. The said proposal thereupon was forwarded to the Government vide a communication dated 19.07.2018. It was further mentioned that as regards the rest of the members of the Association could not be ascertained by the concerned Assistant Settlement Officer during the re-verification/re-enquiry by the concerned Assistant Settlement Officer and as such, no application for allotment of land could be Page No.# 8/11 obtained from them, who perhaps resided elsewhere in their alternative lands. 11. It is very pertinent to take note of Annexure-A to the said affidavit, wherein the communication dated 19.07.2018 has been enclosed. A perusal of Annexure to the said document clearly reveals the names of 31 persons which were forwarded to the Government for settlement. The total land for settlement was 14 kathas 02 chataks. The petitioners’ name featured at Sl. Nos. 1 and 26. 12. When the writ petition was listed before this Court on 22.06.2026, this Court observed that the affidavit so filed by the respondent No.4 was inadequate. Under such circumstances, the District Commissioner, Hailakandi and the Revenue and Disaster Management Department were directed to apprise this Court as to what steps have been taken towards granting the settlement/allotment of the land to the petitioners as well as the 29 other whose names were forwarded. In pursuance thereto, a communication issued by the Additional Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Revenue and Disaster Management Department (S&S) Department dated 06.08.2026 was placed before this Court by Mr. G Hazarika, the learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department. The said communication is kept on record and marked with the letter ‘X’. Page No.# 9/11 13. From a perusal of the said communication, it is seen that the Revenue and Disaster Management Department could not trace out the physical file of the documents which were forwarded by the Office of the District Commissioner, Hailakandi. However, in order to avoid any delay due to non-availability of the physical records, the Department has asked the District Commissioner, Hailakandi to submit a fresh individual proposals for settlement of the Government land admeasuring 14 kathas 02 chataks covered by 2nd R.S. Dag No.433 (Pt.) of Mouza Panchgram, in favour of the Petitioners and 29 others, erosion-affected families, together with all requisite documents as prescribed under the extant Rules and the Assam Land Policy of 2019. 14. Taking into account that there would be a requirement for submission of fresh proposals, it is the opinion of this Court that the instant writ petition can be disposed of by passing appropriate directions. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i). The materials on record clearly indicate that the petitioners herein, along with 29 others have been were found to be eligible for allotment of Government land, which is a part of Dag No.433. This aspect is apparent from the communication which was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi dated 19.07.2018 read Page No.# 10/11 with the Annexure to the said document. (ii). The petitioners herein shall submit applications for allotment/settlement of the land under their possession. (iii). Taking into account that the remaining 29 other erosion- affected persons are not parties to the present proceedings, the District Commissioner, Hailakandi, as well as the Circle Officer of the Algapur Revenue Circle, are jointly and severely directed to inform the other 29 persons, to submit their applications for allotment. In addition to that, this Court grants liberty to the remaining 29 persons to also submit the application even without the intervention of the District Commissioner, Hailakandi, or the Circle Officer Algapur Revenue Circle. (iv). Upon such applications being submitted, the District Commissioner, Hailakandi shall prepare a revised proposal, based upon the various orders being passed by this Court, reference to which, this Court has already made in the body of the present judgment. The revised proposal be submitted within 3(three) months from the receipt of the respective applications. (v). This Court further directs the Revenue and Disaster Management Department to consider the revised proposals in accordance with law and in the light of the various directions passed by this Court in the various orders referred to Page No.# 11/11 hereinabove, as well as the present judgment, and also the Assam Land Policy of 2019. (vi). Taking into account that that the petitioners along with the other erosion-affected families are running from pillar to post for the last 35 years, this Court observes that the Revenue Department shall complete the exercise within a period of 6(six) months from the receipt of the revised proposal. (vii). This Court observes and directs that during the pendency of the proposals before the District Commissioner and/or the Revenue Department, the respondent authorities under no circumstances shall take any steps for eviction of the petitioners. It is further observed that in the circumstance the proposals are rejected, steps for eviction can only be taken by following the mandate of Md. Salak Uddin Vs. State of Assam and Others reported in (2024) SCC Online Gau 921. JUDGE Comparing Assistant