Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010196232025 2026:GAU-AS:590 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5111/2025 JOHURUDDIN AHMED S/O- SUMESH UDDIN, R/O- SONERTARI, P.O. PACHIM MAZDIA, PIN- 781305, MOUZA- CHENGA, P.S. TARABARI, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA BARPETA-781301 ASSAM 3:THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR BARPETA BARPETA-781301 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H SAIKIA, MR. B BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER Date : 20/01/2026 Page No.# 2/3 1. Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Handique, learned Government Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The limited grievance of the writ petitioner is that he had applied for ‘NOC’ for sale of a plot of land. The NOC was obtained from the Office of the District Commissioner, Barpeta on 23/06/2024. However, because of computer system failure in the Office of the Deputy Registrar, the Sale Deed could not be registered. The NOC, which was earlier issued to the writ petitioner, was expired on 24/12/2024. Subsequently, when the petitioner attempted to have the Sale Deed registered, the same was declined by the Deputy Registrar on the ground that the NOC had expired. The application made by the petitioner before the Office of the Additional District Commissioner, Barpeta, seeking extension of the NOC was also not accepted. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Upon liberty being granted, the learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Assam, has obtained instruction. Today, when the matter is called up, Mr. J. Handique, learned counsel appearing for the District Commissioner, Barpeta, has placed before the Court a set of instructions and submitted that the NOC granted to the writ petition was on an application made by the petitioner through the ‘Online’ mode. However, upon expiry of the period specified in the NOC, the application for extension was made in the ‘Offline’ mode. Under such circumstances, an NOC, which was granted on the basis of ‘Online’ application, can be extended only when the application is made ‘Online’. 4. Considering the instructions received by the Government counsel appearing for the State and the submissions made before this Court on the basis of the instructions received, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be closed at this stage, granting liberty to take steps to apply for fresh ‘NOC’ Online. 5. If such an application is made by the petitioner, then the ‘NOC’ shall be Page No.# 3/3 issued within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of receipt of such application. 6. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant