Page No. 1/5 GAHC010207412026 2026:GAU-AS:14104 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5201/2026 ABDUL KARIM AND 4 ORS S/O LT BOSIR UDDIN, R/O VILL ANANDANAGAR, P.O. AND P.S. BILASIPARA, DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN 783348 2: ABDUL MOSKET S/O LT BOSIR UDDIN R/O VILL ANANDANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783348 3: ABDUL MALEK S/O LT BOSIR UDDIN R/O VILL ANANDANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783348 4: RAHMAN ALI S/O LT BOSIR UDDIN R/O VILL ANANDANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783348 5: ABDUL MOTIN S/O LT BOSIR UDDIN R/O VILL ANANDANAGAR P.O. AND P.S. BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM Page No. 2/5 PIN 78334 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, REVENUE (RR) AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY 06 2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORD RUPNAGAR GHY 32 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHUBRI PS AND PS DHUBRI PIN 783301 4:THE CO DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BILASIPARA DHUBRI PS AND PO BILASIPARA DHUBRI PIN 783348 5:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER DHUBRI PO AND PS AND DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783301 6:THE CHAIRMAN BILASIPARA SUB DIVISIONAL LAND ADVISORY BOARD CUM SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER C BILASIPARA PO AND PS BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 783348 7:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BILASIPARA REVENUE CIRCLE PO AND PS BILASIPARA DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 78334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD H R AHMED, MR J ISLAM,MR A ALIM SK Page No. 3/5 Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 23.09.2026 Heard Mr. H.R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue & Disaster Management Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 3 & 4. 2. The petitioners, five in nos., are all sons of one Late Bosir Uddin. The petitioners have approached this Court by the present writ petition stating that the family of the petitioners has been in long, continuous, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of a plot of land measuring 2 Bighas 2 Kathas 1 Lessa covered by Dag no. 220 [old] / 216 [New] at Revenue Village – Anandnagar, Mouza – Bilasipara, Bilasipara Revenue Circle, District – Dhubri [‘the subject-plot’, for short]. According to the petitioners, the subject-plot is presently a Government khas and ceiling surplus land. The petitioners have contended that the name of their grandfather was earlier recorded in Khatian Form no. VII dated 19.09.1962 and, subsequently, the name of the petitioners’ father Bosir Uddin was recorded in the concerned Chitha pertaining to the subject-plot as a recognized occupant. The petitioners have claimed that the family has been paying land revenue against the subject-plot regularly. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that when the State Government notified Mission Basundhara 2.0 Scheme for settlement of Government khas and ceiling surplus land in favour of the landless persons, the petitioners applied for settlement of the subject-plot it being khas and ceiling surplus land, on 12.01.2023 and the said application was received vide Acknowledgment no. RTPS/SKCSL/2023/654231. However, the application submitted by the petitioners was shown to be rejected on the basis of a field enquiry, in which the land is found to have been encroached in recent years in organised basis. Page No. 4/5 4. The petitioners have contended that the rejection of the Application dated 12.01.2023 was made by a non-speaking order. The petitioners have submitted that before rejection of the application, the applicants therein were not afforded any opportunity of hearing and the reason recorded was without any basis and the same was not as per situation prevalent in the ground in respect of the subject-plot. 5. Ms. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department has submitted, on the basis of instructions received, that after rejection of the Application dated 12.01.2023 for settlement of khas and ceiling surplus land under Mission Basundhara 2.0, it would still be open for the petitioners to submit a fresh application under Mission Basundhara Scheme which is stated to be in currency. 6. Ms. Bordoloi has submitted on the basis of instructions contained in an Office Letter bearing no. E786345/I/1555646/2026 dated 14.05.2026, received from the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam, that the settlement of Government khas and ceiling surplus land under Mission Basundhara 2.0 has been rolled out perpetually via the Sewa Setu Portal, as per Government Notification eCF no. 565802/I/772778/2024 dated 15.10.2024. It has been further mentioned that an applicant can apply afresh for land settlement through the Sewa Setu Portal as per the existing guidelines, despite rejection of the earlier application. In response, Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners may be allowed to submit an application afresh along with all the supporting documents. 7. As it is open for the petitioners to file an application for settlement of Government khas and ceiling surplus land afresh, the petitioners have the option of filing an application for settlement of Government khas and ceiling surplus land afresh by complying with all the requisite formalities as per the existing guidelines through the Sewa Setu Portal. Considering the fact that the petitioners’ earlier Application dated 12.01.2023 was rejected, this Court deems it proper to close of the writ petition, allowing the petitioners to submit an application for settlement of the subject-plot afresh by complying with all the requisite formalities as per Page No. 5/5 the existing guidelines through the Sewa Setu Portal. 8. In the event the petitioners submit a fresh application, the respondent authorities while considering the application, shall duly consider the petitioners’ claim regarding the long, continuous, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of the subject-plot and the facts asserted by the petitioners as regards reflection of the name of predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners in Khatian Form no VII dated 19.09.1962. It is needless to mention that consideration of the petitioners’ application must be disposed of by way of a reasoned order. In the event the petitioners feel themselves aggrieved by the manner of disposal of the application, the petitioners will be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy as permissible under the law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant