Page No.# 1/10 GAHC010202012026 2026:GAU-AS:14161 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5174/2026 SHORIF UDDIN AND 31 ORS. S/O- LATE. ABDUL KHALEK 2: NARUL ALI S/O- LATE CHIRAJ ALI 3: ABDUL SALAM ALIAS ABDUL CHALAM S/O- LATE AKKACH ALI 4: NOOR MAHAMMAD S/O- SAMSER ALI 5: RAFIJUL HAQUE ALIAS RAFIQUL ISLAM S/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD 6: JAMAL UDDIN S/O- LATE MAHAR UDDIN 7: RAHMAN ALI ALIAS RAMJAN ALI S/O- LATE MAHAR UDDIN 8: JALAL UDDIN S/O- LATE AMSAR ALI 9: HANUFA KHATUN ALIAS HANUFA BEGUM W/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD 10: SULTAN ALI S/O- LATE ABUL KASHEM 11: ISMAIL ALI S/O- LATE CHAFIULLAH 12: SORIFUL ISLAM ALIAS SIRAUL ISLAM Page No.# 2/10 S/O- LATE HANIF ALI 13: CHAIDUL ISLAM S/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD 14: SAIDUL ISLAM ALIAS SAIDUL ALI S/O- LT. ABDUL KADIR 15: MOIDUL ISLAM S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI 16: NIJAMUDDIN S/O- LATE CHAYAB ALI 17: AHID ALI S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI 18: KURJAT ALI S/O- LATE SHAHED ALI 19: MUKTAR HUSSAIN S/O- SAYED ALI 20: MANJUR RAHMAN S/O-LT. JALILUR RAHMAN 21: SIRAJUL ISLAM S/O- NEWAJ ALI 22: MUJAMMIL HOQUE S/O- MOHAMMAD ALI 23: MAMUD ALI S/O-LATE. ISMAIL ALI 24: SOHAR ALI S/O-LATE. FAIJUDDIN ALI 25: CHAMED ALI S/O - HAMED ALI 26: UMAR ALI S/O. LATE ABDUL MANNAN 27: MAFIYA BEGUM W/O. LATE. ABDUL KALAM 28: RAFUL ALI ALIAS RAFUL AMIN Page No.# 3/10 S/O- MAMUD ALI 29: AJIJUL ISLAM ALIAS AIJUL ISLAM S/O- MAMUD ALI 30: RAFIQUL ISLAM S/O- MAMUD ALI 31: SAHED ALI ALIAS SHAID ALI S/O- HAMED ALI 32: MOINUL ISLAM S/O- MAMUD ALI PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 27 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE 9/6 KOILAMARI AND PETITIONERS NO. 28 TO 32 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- BORBIL GAON ALL ARE UNDER P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, DISPUR-GHY-06. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ETC ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-32. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER LAKHIMPUR NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. PIN-787001. 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER NORTH LAKHIMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. A HUSSAIN, MR. K ALOM,MR. T ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE Page No.# 4/10 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY JUDGMENT 23.09.2026 Heard Mr. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. N. Das, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 3 & 4. 2. The petitioners, 32 in nos., have joined together to institute the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution stating that they have a common cause of action. As regards the common cause of action, the petitioners have stated that they have been residing in various parcel of Government land at 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village and Borbil Revenue village, as mentioned in the Table given in paragraph 4 of the writ petition, since long. The petitioners have approached this Court by the instant writ petition on being aggrieved by issuance of similar notices to them on 06.08.2026 by the respondent no. 4. Some of those notices are annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3 series. 3. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has referred to the contents of the notices in Assamese dated 06.08.2026 to advance his submissions. 4. For ready reference, the contents of a notice dated 06.08.2026 are extracted hereinbelow :- GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM Office of the Circle Officer : North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle: Lakhimpur No: NL.L.C/Eviction - 2026/1346 Date: 06/08/2026 Page No.# 5/10 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx NOTICE REGARDING EVICTION UNDER SETTLEMENT RULE 18(2) OF THE ASSAM LAND AND REVENUE REGULATION, 1886. NOTICE It is hereby informed to you that it has come to the notice of the undersigned that you have unlawfully occupied general Government land in 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village under North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle. In view of this, in accordance with Government Notice No. 18[2] under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, observing the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, Appeal no. 1132/2011, @ S.L.P. [C] no. 3109/2011 [Jagpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others], Md. Salak Uddin vs. the State of Assam and two others on June 27, 2024, and Supreme Court Writ Petition [Civil] no. 295/2022, and as per the Revenue and Disaster Management Department Office Memorandum no. RLR-162/2008/25 dated 06.02.2010 and H.H. 188/2011/Pt./29 dated 15 June 2015, under the powers conferred upon the undersigned under Rule 18[2] and 18[3] of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, you are directed to submit any documents supporting your claim, details, and circumstances regarding any house, shop, building, or other construction erected by you on the said land to the Office of the Circle Officer, North Lakhimpur, within 15 [fifteen] days. A hearing regarding this matter will be conducted on 24.08.2026 at 11-00 a.m. If during the hearing you are proven to be an encroacher, you must remove or clear any house, shop, building, or any type of crop constructed or grown by you from the land at your own expense within 15 [fifteen] days, and vacate the land. Otherwise, eviction action will be carried out by the administration as per the rules. Furthermore, if you fail to appear at the office of the undersigned on the date Page No.# 6/10 fixed for the hearing, the matter will be disposed of ex-parte based on the available records, and eviction orders will be issued against you without any further communication. Consider this matter urgent. Schedule of Land : Revenue Village: 9/6 Koilamari Mouza : Nakari / Borbil Dag No.: xxx 5. From the notices, it transpires that the noticees were asked to appear in the office of the respondent no. 4 on 24.08.2026 to submit all documents in support of their respective claims qua their occupation under different Dag numbers of Government land in 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village or Borbil Revenue Village, Mouza – Nakari, North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle. The notices have made reference to Rule 18[2] and Rule 18[3] of the Settlement Rules, framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886; the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no. 1132/2011 arising out of SLP[C] no. 3109/2011 [Jagpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, (2011) 11 SCC 396]; Civil Appeal no. 295/2022 [Abdul Khaleque and others vs. State of Assam and others]; and the Judgment and Order dated 27.06.2024 in W.P.[C] no. 1057/2022 [Md. Salak Uddin vs. the State of Assam and others], [2024] 4 GLT 857. The respondent no. 4 has asked the noticees to explain the circumstances under which the noticees have constructed houses, shops, buildings or other constructions in Government land under various Dag numbers falling under 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village or Borbil Revenue Village, Mouza – Nakari, North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle within fifteen days from the date of issuance of the notice also on 24.08.2026. 6. In the notice, it is further mentioned that during the course of enquiry, if any of the noticees are found out to be an illegal encroacher, such noticee would be required to vacate from the area of land in respect of which he is found out to be an illegal encroacher and also, to remove all types of crops or structures at his own expense within a period of fifteen days Page No.# 7/10 from the date of hearing. Else, eviction process would be carried out as per law and the costs incurred for the eviction would be recovered from such noticee. It has been informed that in the event a noticee would fail to appear at the office of the respondent no. 4 on the date scheduled for hearing, the matter would be decided ex-parte on the basis of existing records and there would be no further communication before an Order of eviction. 7. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the notice is silent about individual consideration of the claim of each of the noticees as regards his or her possession over the parcels of Government land under different Dag numbers within 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village and Borbil Revenue Village, North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle. He has submitted that the petitioners are in long, continuous and uninterrupted possession of different areas of land, small in sizes. The petitioners were earlier having lands and they had been rendered homeless and landless due to various reasons. 8. Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Das have responded by submitting that the notices are as per the provisions of the Settlement Rules, framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886 and in deference of the procedure indicated in the decisions referred to in the notices. It is submitted by them that the parcels of land under unauthorized occupation of the petitioners are Government land and, therefore, the procedure laid down in Rule 18[2] is applicable. They have submitted, in view of the allegation made by the petitioners in para 9 of the writ petition that the receipt of the representations of the petitioners were not acknowledged, the petitioners may, along with a copy of this writ petition, also produce the copies of the representations, stated to have been submitted already before the respondent no. 4, once again. 9. Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules has provided for ejection. Sub-rule [2] of Rule 18 has provided that when such a person entered into possession of Government khas land, or Waste land or estate over which no person has acquired the rights of a proprietor, land-holder or settlement-holder or any land that has previously been reserved roads or roadside land or for the grazing of village cattle or for other public purposes, or has entered into possession of land from which he has been excluded by general or special orders and when further, there is Page No.# 8/10 no bonafide claim of right involved he may be ejected or ordered to vacate the land forthwith, and the Deputy Commissioner may sell, confiscate or destroy any crop raised, or any building or other construction erected without authority on the land. Sub-rule [3][a] of the Rule 18 has provided for ejectment in all other cases which do not fall under Rule 18[2]. Rule 18[3] [a] has prescribed for publication of a notice requiring the occupant to vacate the land specified in a notice, within fifteen days from the date of publication of the notice in the manner prescribed and to remove any buildings, houses, fences or crops, etc. which may have been raised on such land, provided that the Deputy Commissioner may give time to any particular occupant to harvest the crops, if any, growing on such land. 10. The law regarding common village land/community land like VGR, PGR has been well settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh [supra] and the same is not required to be adverted to. On consideration of the provisions of Rule 18, a Division Bench of this Court in Salak Uddin [supra] has drawn a conclusion that the revenue authorities cannot be permitted to unilaterally decide as to whether an occupier/possessor has a bonafide claim of right involved in as much as it would require adjudication of both law and facts and if an opportunity to the occupier/possessor is not provided, the same would be in violation of the principles of natural justice which, in turn, would violate Article 14, Article 19 and Article 21 of the Constitution. It has been observed that prior notice to the occupier/possessor before initiation of proceeding under Rule 18[2] of the Settlement Rules is the mandate of law in order to save Rule 18[2] of the Settlement Rules from being constitutionally invalid on procedural grounds. 11. This Court having regard to the provisions of the Settlement Rules and the observations made in Salak Uddin [supra] finds no infirmity in issuance of the notices dated 06.08.2026, the it conforms on the aspects regarding serving prior notices and grant of opportunity to file representation and to afford personal hearing. 12. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that in response to the notices, the petitioners/noticees have already responded by submitting their individual replies along with all the supporting documents in respect of their claim, more particularly, Page No.# 9/10 about the long and continuous occupation of the petitioners or predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners to reside in the areas in question. 13. It is relevant to refer to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Abdul Khaleque and others vs. State of Assam and others, 2026 INSC 140, which arose out of notices issued by an authority in the State Government to the appellants therein on the premise that the appellants were allegedly residing inside reserved forest areas. The Hon’ble Supreme Court did not find any infirmity in the process sought to be adopted by the State respondents for removal of encroachment, as the process is found to have conformed to the principles of fairness, reasonable and due process. The process to be adopted in the case in hand is similar to the process adopted therein for removal of encroachment. 14. On the process sought to be adopted by the State respondents for removal of encroachment from reserved forest areas, placed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the State Government had undertaken that if an unauthorised occupation is found under the reserved area after scrutiny of the documents, a speaking order would be passed and shall be served on the concerned person, giving him fifteen days’ notice to vacate the unauthorised occupation and only after expiry of the period of notice, the action shall be taken to remove the unauthorised occupants. 15. 15. Taking note of the above observations of the Division Bench in Salak Uddin [supra] and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Abdul Khaleque [supra], this Court is of the considered view that when a noticee is served with a notice alleging unauthorised occupation on his part of any plot of land, which falls in the categories mentioned in Rule 18[2] of the Settlement Rules, the noticee is to be given due opportunity of placing his or her case before the authority by way of a representation, if he chooses to do so, and thereafter, the authority is obligated to give due consideration to such representation submitted in response to the notice qua the claim made by the noticee, and to all the documents, if any, submitted along with the representation in support of his or her claim, regarding his or her occupation and right to be settled on the concerned plot of land, and thereafter, to pass a speaking order as regards the status of the noticee qua the plot of land, stated to be under his or her Page No.# 10/10 occupation. 16. As Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have already submitted their representations in response to the notices and a hearing has already been taken place, the responsibility is now cast upon the authority to dispose of each of the representations so submitted by passing a speaking order individually. It is accordingly ordered. The speaking order so passed is to be communicated to each of the petitioners immediately thereafter. It is only after determining the status of each of the noticees in the afore-mentioned manner, further action contemplated is to be taken by following due procedure. 17. To facilitate the process of consideration of the representations and passing speaking orders, the petitioners shall submit a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition with annexures and the copies of the representation, stated to have been submitted by the petitioners with an allegation that receipt of the copies of the representation were not acknowledged, before the respondent no. 4 within a period of seven days from today. 18. With the observations made and the directions given above, the writ petition is disposed of. There is no order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant