Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010158032022 2026:GAU-AS:4639 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5230/2022 SMT. BHANU SHARMA AND ANR. W/O SRI BIKASH SHARMA, R/O RUPNAGAR, ULUBARI, P.O.- RUPMAGAR, GUWAHATI, DIST.- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. 2: MONIKA SHARMA D/O LATE RANU SHARMA R/O RUPNAGAR ULUBARI P.O.- RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI DIST.- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SIVASAGAR DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 784680. 3:THE SUB- DIVISIONAL OFFICER SIVASAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 784680. Page No.# 2/6 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER SIVASAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 784680. 5:SATYEN SHARMA S/O LATE NIL SHARMA VILL.- NULLANG KATONI P.O.- NAZIRA DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 784680 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B BURAGOHAIN, MR. A K GUPTA,MR. P GOHAIN,MS. K BARUAH,MS. D BORGOHAIN,MS M BORAH,MS. M SARMAH,MR. U J SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. B J DAS (r-5),MS P AGARWAL (r-5),MR H RAHMAN (r-5),SC, REVENUE BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA 31.03.2026 ORDER Heard Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. J. Handique, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4. Also heard Ms. P. R. Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and Ms. S. Nath, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 5. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for issuance of a direction to the respondent authorities to review the order dated 31.05.2007 passed in partition case No. 278/04-05 passed by the Page No.# 3/6 Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Sivsagar. 3. The petitoners' case is that the petitioners are the co-pattadars of periodic patta No.70 covered by Dag No. 399 (Part) of village-Hullang Katoni Gaon, Mouza-Nazira under Nazira Revenue Circle, District-Sivsagar in respect of a land measuring 2 bighas 1 katha 16 lechas out of 4 bighas 3 kathas 12 lechas. The respondent No. 5, namely, Mr. Satyen Sharma being a co-pattadars instituted a partition case vide No.16/1999-2000 before the Sub Divisional Officer (Nazira), Sivsagar for partition of the said land. It is contended that in the aforesaid partition case, no notice was served upon the petitioners and the petitioners were completely ignorant about passing of any order by the aforesaid Sub Divisional Officer (Nazira), Sivsagar in the aforesaid partition case. The petitioners came to know about the order dated 29.08.2001, whereby the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Nazira has affirmed the partition as sought for by the respondent No. 5, being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Assam Board of Revenue which was registered as Case No.114 RA(S)/2001. The Assam Board of Revenue, after hearing the parties, passed a judgment dated 21.02.2002, wherein, it was held that while passing the order on the aforesaid partition case No.16/1999-2000, no notice was in fact received by the present petitioners and therefore, since the order was passed without hearing the present petitioners, the order dated 29.08.2001 could not be sustained and therefore, the same was set aside by allowing the appeal. It was also observed that in view of setting aside of the impugned order, any action taken in consequence of that order also became void ab-initio. Thereafter, on 22.01.2003, the Circle Page No.# 4/6 Officer (C), Nazira, Revenue Circle issued an order, whereby the demarcation was done as well as the boundary of the land has been identified. 4. On 18.01.2005, the petitioner filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Sivsagar with a prayer for issuance of patta in respect of Kheraj Myadi Patta No.70, Dag No.399 land measuring 4 bighas 3 kathas 12 lechas out of 2 bighas 1 katha 16 lechas which was in the possession of the petitioners. Accordingly, the Sub Divisional (S) isued a letter on 25.08.2005 to the Circle Officer, Nazira Revenue Circle informing him that the petitioners, namely, Bhanu Sharma and Ranu Sharma may given their due share 1 bigha 2 kathas 14 2/5 lechas from Dag No.399 only in respect of PP case No.278/04-05. Thereafter, on 31.05.2007, the Sub Divisional Officer, Sivsagar issued an order, wherein, it was stated that on the report of the Circle Officer, Nazira Revenue Circle on the basis of the application submitted by the petitioners, there was a need of correction in the order of partition dated 14.04.2005 and therefore, complete partition was granted in the name of Bhanu Sarma and Ranu Sarma in respect of land measuring 1B-2K-141/2L under the possession of the petitioners covered by Dag No.399 under Myadi Patta No.70 of village Halongkatoni under Nazira Mauza. 5. Since the petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 31.05.2007, whereby in partition PP Case No.278/04-05, they have been allotted only 1 bigha, 2 kathas instead of 2 bighas 1 katha 16 lechas, they have filed a representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Sivsagar on 20.07.2010 Page No.# 5/6 and since no action has been done on their representation, the petitioners has filed the instant writ petition before this Court. 6. Mr. J. Handique, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4 has submitted that there is an alternative remedy in the instant matter and therefore, the instant writ petition is not maintainable. He submits that in view of a judgment by a coordinate bench of this Court, this petition can be disposed of by directing the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief. In this connection, he has referred to the case of Riju Prasad Sarma-vs-The State of Assam and Ors., reported in MANU/GH/0407/2022, wherein, it has been held that a dispute in partition, an appropriate relief can be sought for by filing an application under Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 and the Assam Right to Public Services Rules, 2012. He submits that in the above referred case, the same issue of partition came before a coordinate bench of this Court and the coordinate bench of this Court while not entertaining the writ petition has directed the petitioners therein to seek recourse and or any remedy under the aforesaid Acts and Rules by filing appropriate application under the aforesaid Acts and Rules. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has also consented to file such an application under the aforesaid Acts and Rules of 2012 before the appropriate authority. 8. In consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties as well as taking into consideration Page No.# 6/6 the provisions of aforesaid Acts of 2012 and Rules of 2012, this Court is also of the considered view that the instant writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to pursue a appropriate relief/remedy under the aforesaid Acts of 2012 and Rules of 2012. 9. In view of the aforesaid, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority under the provisions of Acts of 2012 and Rules of 2012. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant