SITARAM KANOO AND 17 OTHERS v. NISARG HIVAREA, IAS AND ANR.
Cont.Cas(C)/228/2025 · 2026-03-05
Devashis Baruah
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2683 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2683 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010086762025
2026:GAU-AS:3419
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/228/2025 SITARAM KANOO AND 17 OTHERS S/O LATE SIBA PRASAD KANOO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II, PO SULTANICHERRA, DIST HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 2: KESHAB PRASAD KANU S/O SRIPRASHAD KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 3: MIRA KANU D/O LATE BRAJARANGI KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 4: SUBODH KANU S/O LATE PUJAN KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 5: PRATIMA KANU D/O LATE PUJAN KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI
Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM 6: BIDYA SAGAR KANU S/O LATE PUJAN KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 7: RAJEN KANU S/O BRAJARANGI KANU
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 8: PRATAP DAS S/O LATE RANJIT DAS
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 9: RAJU DAS S/O LATE RANJIT DAS
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 10: TAHAMIN BAHAR CHOUDHURY @ LASKAR W/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 11: SAMSUL HAQUE LASKAR S/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
Page No.# 3/5
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 12: NUR NEHAR LASKAR D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 13: NUR JAHAN LASKAR D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 14: MINARA BEGUM LASKAR D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 15: SAJNA BEGUM LASKAR BARBHUYAN D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 16: MOINUL HOQUE LASKAR S/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II
Page No.# 4/5 PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 17: PIYARA BEGUM LASKAR D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 18: SUPIYA BEGUM LASKAR D/O ALI AHMED LASKAR
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALOICHERRA PART II PO SULTANICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI ASSA VERSUS NISARG HIVAREA, IAS AND ANR. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM COMPETENT AUTHORITY, HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788151 2:ABHISHEK JAIN DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM COMPETENT AUTHORITY HAILAKANDI DISTRICT-HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-788151 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr.
B Rahman
Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. R Saha
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
Page No.# 5/5 06.03.2026
It is seen from the affidavit filed by the respondent No.2 that in pursuance to the order dated 06.12.2024 passed in WP(C)No.6487/2024, the respondent No.2 had already made the verification and found that the eligible beneficiaries of village Paloicherra Pt-II were entitled to an amount of Rs.32,85,501/- and in that regard, the District Commissioner, Hailakandi had already requested the Chief Engineer, PWD, (NH), Assam, Chandmari, Guwahati vide the communication dated 26.05.2025 for disbursement of the said amount. 2. It is further seen that a reminder has also been issued by the District Commissioner, Hailakandi on 22.12.2025. 3. It is the opinion of this Court that the directions so passed by the learned Coordinate Bench in the order dated 06.12.2024 was only against the District Commissioner and the same had been duly complied with. 4. Accordingly, the instant contempt proceedings stands dropped. 5. Liberty is given to the petitioners to take action against the PWD authorities in the circumstance, the amount to which the petitioners are held to be entitled is not disbursed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant