JUDGMENT : Devashis Baruah, J. Heard Mr. R. P. Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. Doley, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Chutia, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of KAAC and Mr. N. Goswami, the learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State Respondents. 2. The Petitioners 163 in numbers claim to be residents of Kheroni in the District of Karbi Anglong, Assam. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that all these Petitioners belong to certain tribal community like Biharis and Gorkha Community and are cattle grazers, daily wage labourers and cultivators. It is the claim of the Petitioners that since 1946-47 their forefathers have been residing in these areas as cultivators and cattle grazers and the Petitioners being their descendants have continued to do so, while the Petitioners have been paying the forest department the necessary charges for grazing permit, and also for the revenue on the lands which they claim to be under their occupation, the Petitioners were surprised to be informed from the Revenue Authorities that they are likely to be evicted in view of notice which was issued as far back as July, 2024. Copy of the said notice is enclosed as Annexure-B to the writ petition. 3. The learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners were not aware of the aforesaid notice and it is only after the recent ethnic violences which have erupted in the West Karbi Anlong District they aware of the existence of the said notice. The learned Senior counsel for the Petitioners submits that no specific or individual notices have been issued and the Petitioners have been verbally informed that they will be evicted from these lands in terms of the eviction notice dated 11.07.2024. Being aggrieved the Petitioners are before this Court. 4. Mr. J. Chutia, learned Standing Council, KAAC strongly objects to the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners. It is submitted that these Petitioners have claimed to be occupants of the said lands for the last several decades, but there is no specific description of the land under their occupation which has been mentioned in the writ petition. J. Chutia, learned Standing Council, KAAC strongly objects to the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners. It is submitted that these Petitioners have claimed to be occupants of the said lands for the last several decades, but there is no specific description of the land under their occupation which has been mentioned in the writ petition. Although references have been made in respect of payment of land revenues and forest use, the specific particulars pertaining to the land stated to be under their occupation is not specified in the writ petition and therefore, they cannot have any right over Government land or PGR/VGR land in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Jagpal Singh Vs The State of Punjab & Others reported in (2011) 11 SCC 396 . 5. The learned Standing Counsel, KAAC, however, submits that if the Petitioners have any particulars of the land under their possession then they should furnish the same before the Respondent No.7. 6. In view of the submissions made and on perusal of the pleadings available in the writ petition, this Court is of the view that ends of justice will be met, if this writ petition is disposed of at this stage without issuing any notice directing the Petitioners to submit a representation with the particulars of the land stated to be under their occupations along with all relevant documents to substantiate their claims before the Respondent No.7. The Petitioners must submit such representation with the land particulars before the Respondent No.7 on individual basis making respective claims against the land under their occupation. If the Petitioners are able to submit such representation with particulars before the authorities within a period of 30 days from today, the Respondent Nos.2 and 7 shall examine such representations and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period and preferably within 3 (three) months from the date of submission of such representation. 7. Till such representations are disposed off by the Respondent Authorities, the Respondent Authorities shall not proceed to evict the Petitioners who had submitted the representation as permitted by this Court within the time stipulated hereinabove. 7. Till such representations are disposed off by the Respondent Authorities, the Respondent Authorities shall not proceed to evict the Petitioners who had submitted the representation as permitted by this Court within the time stipulated hereinabove. If in the event, in spite of the liberty being granted by this Court, the Petitioners or any of them do not submit the representations before the Respondent No.7, then the Respondent Authorities would be at liberty to take action as per the procedure of law.Accordingly, the matter stands disposed of in terms of the above. 8. Copy of this order be served upon the learned Standing Counsel, KAAC for due compliance. 9. With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.