Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010264632025 2026:GAU-AS:5752 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7203/2025 GIRIDHAR KALITA S/O- LATE JYOTISH KALITA, R/O- VILLAGE- KHETRIHARDIA/MAJARKURI, P.S. HAJO, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (R), ASSAM, PIN- 781102 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON ASSAM 3:SMTI. AFREEN HUSSAIN THE CIRCLE OFFICER HAJO REVENUE CIRCLE . DISTRICT- KAMRUP (R) ASSAM 4:SMTI REHULI DEFUSHA LAT MANDAL HAJO REVENUE CIRCLE KAMRUP (R) ASSAM 5:SRI RANGAN SARMA LAT MANDAL HAJO REVENUE CIRCLE KAMRUP Page No.# 2/9 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. J SARMA,MS. M NATH,G IMTIAZ,MR. A IKBAL ,MS. A MAHANTA,MS. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. SHEELADITYA (R4,5),P KHATANIAR(R3),MR. U S BORA (R3),SC, REVENUE BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 27.04.2026 Heard Mr. G. Imtiaz, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department, Assam, appearing for the respondent No. 1, Mr. H. Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2, Mr. U.S. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. Sheeladitya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5. 2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 17.04.2025, passed in Mutation Case No. KAM/HAZ/2024- 25/2025000110930/FMUT, and seeks restoration of the petitioner’s mutation dated 16.06.2023 in Mutation Case No. KAM/HAZ/2022- 23/31077/OMUTC. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner claims to be the lawful purchaser and pattadar of land measuring 1 Katha 10 Page No.# 3/9 Lechas, purchased through a registered Sale Deed No. 508/2023 dated 10.04.2023 from the legal heirs of Late Dhonu Keot, whose family held a demarcated 30-lecha share from the ancestral property of Late Asom Keot. Upon due enquiry, field verification, and compliance with the statutory procedure, mutation was granted to the petitioner on 16.06.2023, and his name was entered into the Jamabandi in respect of the land in question. However, upon facing disturbance from the private respondents, the petitioner was compelled to file a title suit, being T.S. No. 169/2024, along with Misc. (J) Case No. 126/2024, wherein the learned trial court was pleased to grant an injunction by order dated 03.08.2024, restraining interference with the petitioner’s possession. Despite the aforesaid injunction, the mutation was cancelled without notice to, or hearing of, the petitioner. 4. Mr. G. Imtiaz, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, submits that though an appeal has been filed against the cancellation of the mutation, seeking restoration thereof before the office of the District Commissioner, Kamrup (R), on 13.08.2025, the same has not yet been considered or disposed of. 5. Per contra, Mr. Sheeladitya, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 & 5, submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable inasmuch as, under the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulation, 1886”), an appeal lies against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (hereinafter referred to as the “SDO”) cancelling the mutation of the petitioner. He further submits that the representation dated Page No.# 4/9 13.08.2025 to the District Commissioner, enclosed as Annexure-9 in the writ petition, cannot be construed as an appeal under Regulation 147 of the Regulation, 1886. 6. Mr. H. Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Counsel for respondent No. 2, fairly submits that under Regulation 147 of the Regulation, 1886, an appeal against the order of the SDO lies before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, and since the appeal has already been filed in the instant case, the writ petition may be disposed of by directing the appellate authority to dispose of the said appeal in accordance with law. 7. Likewise, Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department, Assam, and Mr. U.S. Bora, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, also make submissions to the same effect. 8. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it appears that against an order passed by the SDO, an appeal lies before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner under Regulation 147 of the Regulation, 1886, which reads as under:— “147. Appeals shall lie under this Regulation as follows:— (a) To the Board from orders, original or appellate passed by a Deputy Commissioner Settlement officer or Survey officer; (b) To the Deputy Commissioner, from orders passed by a Subdivisional Officer, an Assistant Commissioner or Extra Assistant Commissioner; (c) To the Settlement Officer, from orders passed by an Assistant Settlement Officer; (d) To a Survey Officer, from orders passed by an Assistant Survey Officer: Provided that no appeal shall lie against the following orders:— Page No.# 5/9 (i) Orders of an Assistant Settlement Officer or Assistant Survey Officer under section 21 and 22; (ii) Orders of a Survey Officer or Settlement Officer; (1) Under Section 21, 22, and 24; (2) Apportioning the expense of erecting and repairing boundary- marks in accordance with rules made under section 27; (iii) Orders of a Survey Officer, Settlement Officer or Deputy Commissioner, original or appellate imposing or confirming a fine not exceeding fifty rupees; (iv) Orders of a Deputy Commissioner under section 79 setting aside or refusing to set aside the sale; (v) Any decision given in accordance with an award of arbitrators appointed under section 143, except in the case of fraud or collusion; (vi) Orders under section 148, admitting an appeal after the period of limitation has expired; (vii) Orders expressly declared by this Regulation to be final subject to the provision of section 151.” 9. In the present case, it appears that the Circle Officer, by order dated 17.04.2025, cancelled the mutation in favour of the petitioner. Against the aforesaid cancellation, an appeal has been filed before the District Commissioner, Amingaon, Kamrup (R), Assam, on 13.08.2025, which reads as under:— “To The District Commissioner, Amingaon, Kamrup (R), Assam. Ref: Title Suit No 169/2024 & Misc (J) Case No 126/2024 (dated 03/08/2024) pending before Civil Judge (Jr Divn), Kamrup. Sub:- Complaint against illegal mutation order dated 17-04-2025 passed by the Circle Officer, Hajo in Mutation Case No KAM/HAZ/2024-2025/2025000110930/FMUT in respect of a plot of land measuring 1 Katha 10 lesa covered by Dag no. 934(Old)/1095 Page No.# 6/9 (New)and patta no. 354 (Old)/820 (New) Revenue Village- Bardadhi under Hajo Mouza, Kamrup, Assam. Sir, With due respect, I the undersigned would like to place the following facts for information and necessary action:- 1. That the undersigned is a permanent resident of Hajo. The undersigned is currently serving UD, Senior Secretary to Advocate General, Assam, Gauhati High Court. 2. That in the month of December, 2022 the undersigned was approached by one Sri Romoni Das and Sri Amulyo Das both sons of late Dhonu Keot with a proposal to sell land measuring 1 Katha 10 lesa covered by Dag no. 934(Old)/1095 (New)and patta no. 354 (Old)/820 (New)under Hajo Mouza. On being clearly satisfied with the title and possession of the vendors, I agreed to purchase the said land. 3. That accordingly after completion of the sale formalities and also after securing the requisite sale permission, both the vendors executed a registered deed of sale bearing Deed No 508/2023 dated 10-04-2023 in my favour The vendors handed over khas and vacant possession of the purchased land in my favour. I had also constructed an ekchali Assam type house in my said land for keeping building materials to the Petitioner. My name was also duly mutated in respect of my purchased land vide order dated 16-06- 2023 passed in Mutation Case No KAM/HAZ/2022- 23/31077/OMUTC by your esteemed authority. However, after some months, some persons namely Jibon Das, Achyut Das, both sons of Late Dom Keot, Sri Bhupen Das son of late Thanu Das, Sri Bhaskar Das, son of Late Komola Das and Sri Pallab Das, son of late Arun Das started raising illegal claim over my aforesaid plot of land. 4. That it may be pointed herein that all the aforesaid persons are cousins of my vendors and are legal heirs of Late Asom Keot. Said late Asom Keot during his lifetime was the owner of a plot of land measuring 91 lechas covered by Dag no. 934(Old)/1095 (New)under Hojo Revenue Circle. Said Late Asom Keot had 3 sons namely Late Dom Keot, Late Bhojohu Keot and Late Dhonu Keot. After the death of Asom keot, all his three sons inherited the said property with 30 lechas falling in each share. My vendors are the sons of Late Dhonu Page No.# 7/9 Keot and have clear title over the 30 lechas land by way of inheritance. The remaining persons are the legal heirs of Late Dom Keot and Late Bhojohu Keot to the extent of 60 lechas in total. It may be stated herein that all the legal heirs of Asom Keot had mutually partitioned the aforesaid property decades ago and has been living in their respective shares 5. That as the legal heirs of late Bhojohu Keot and Late Dom Keot caused disturbance over my purchased land with a gang of land grabbers, I filed a Title Suit being T.S No-169/2024 before the Hon'ble Court of Civil Judge (Jr Divn), Amingaon alongwith Misc (J) Case No 126/2024 praying for ad interim temporary injunction against the aforementioned group of persons. The said suit was filed on 03-08-2024. 6. That the Hon'ble Court on 03-08-2024 after hearing the matter was pleased to pass and order of temporary injunction specifically directing the opposite parties not to disturb my peaceful possession over the suit land. After passing of the aforesaid order, I had duly communicated the same to the Hajo Circle Office. All the opposite parties have appeared and contested the said suit which is pending before the Hon'ble Court today. 7. That inspite of the aforesaid Civil Suit filed by me which is pending before the Hon'ble Court of Civil Judge (Jr Divn) Amingaon, and the order of injunction passed by the Hon'ble Court dated 03-08- 2024, the Circle Officer, Hajo in a 04-2025 passed most illegal manner cancelled my valid mutation vide order dated 17-in Mutation Case No KAM/HAZ/2024-2025/2025000110930/FMUT. Having not stopped here, the Circle Officer, Hajo also inserted the names of the opposite parties in the Sadar Jamabandi by deleting my name alongwith the names of my vendors pending disposal of the Civil Suit. 8. That the Circle Officer, Hajo well aware of the fact that once any party has approached a Competent Civil Court for redressal of his grievance, such illegal orders are not only abuse of the process of law but also at the same time contravenes the administrative discipline and is extremely uncalled for. The concerned Officer had no power to pass such order cancelling my valid mutation (Order dated 16-06-2023 passed in Mutation Case No KAM/HAZ/2022- 23/31077/OMUTC) without any notice that too during pendency of a civil suit before a competent court of law. Page No.# 8/9 9. That it has also come to light that the concerned Lat Mandal, namely Smti R.Difusa has been in a open manner conniving with the opposite party giving a total goodbye to the system. The said Lat, Mandal has deliberately filed a false and misleading report leading to such illegal cancellation of my valid mutation. 10. That in light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances I therefore request you to kindly take immediate action in this regard and undo the wrong by restoring my valid mutation granted vide Order dated 16-06-2023 passed in Mutation Case No KAM/HAZ/2022- 23/31077/OMUTC) and be further pleased to recall the erroneous and illegal order dated 17-04-2025 passed in Mutation Case No cancelling my mutation. KAM/HAZ/2024- 2025/2025000110930/FMUT cancelling my mutation. I have annexed all necessary documents for your perusal. My representation may be treated as an appeal against the illegal mutation order. Thanking You Your’s Faithfully (Sri Giridhar Kalita), Son of late Jyotish Kalita Village Khetrihardia, Kamrup, Assam, Ph-9864321181” 10. The contention of the learned counsel for the private respondents that the aforesaid is not an appeal in the strict sense cannot be accepted, inasmuch as, there being no specific format prescribed for filing an appeal under the Regulation, the appeal filed before the District Commissioner, Amingaon, seeking restoration of mutation by setting aside the cancellation order, cannot be said to be contrary to the Regulation, 1886. 11. Since the appeal has not yet been considered, this Court is of the Page No.# 9/9 view that the writ petition can be disposed of, in the interest of justice, by directing the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law, after affording due hearing to all affected parties, within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 12. Ordered accordingly. 13. Let a certified copy of this order, along with the appeal, be submitted before the appellate authority. 14. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant