High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 2811/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Both the writ petitions being interconnected, have been heard together a
Decision
nd are being disposed of by this common judgement and order. While in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 filed by M/s. Durpang Bishnupur Tea Estat e the prayer made is for a direction to the respondents, more particularly the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to forthwith implement Annexure-4 order dated 30.11.2000 by which the petitioner was allotted with a plot of land measuring 75 bighas co vering Dag No. 22 (Kha) of Village Garubandha Tramjuli under Narayanpur Kherajkh at Mouza, in the second writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010, the prayer ma de is to set aside and quash Annexure-L order dated 15.05.2010 by which the pray er of the petitioner (M/s. Bonghshi Gopal Small Tea Plantation Society) for allo tment of the land as indicated in Annexure-K letter dated 01.07.2010 has been r ejected. Prior to such rejection, the petitioner had approached this Court by fi ling W.P.(C) No. 917/2002 on 09.07.2002 challenging the notice dated 19.09.2001 directing the members of the petitioner to remove the crops, house etc. from the land occupied by the members of the petitoner’s society. In the said writ petit ion, the case of the petitioner as reflected in the order dated 06.02.2007 and t he direction thereof were as follows: (cid:28)Heard Mr. S. Katakey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. H.N. Phukan, learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner is a registered Society formed by the educated unemployed youth. The aim and object of the society is to generate self employment amongst the educated unemployed youth. The said society was registered under the Societ ies Registration Act, XXI of 1860 and the registration number is RS/NL/257/B/19 of 2001-2002. It is stated that the members of the petitioner society had been possess ing a plot of land measuring 67 bighas situated at village Garubandha Termjuli, covered by Dag No. 22 (old) 101 Dha, Tha, Da (new) under Mouza, Na-kherajkhat. I t is stated that the petitioner had possessed the said plot of land after purcha sing the same from the original occupiers and also that the said land is a Govt. land. The petitioner society also filed an application dated 02.09.97 for allo tment of the said plot of land for tea cultivation. As the authority did not tak e any tangible action on the application filed by the petitioner society on 02.0 9.97, the petitioner society again filed another application dated 18.03.98 in a form of reminder to the application dated 02.09.97 for allotment of the said la nd. While the said application filed by the petitioner for allotment of the said land are pending with the concerned authority, the learned Additional Deput y Commissioner, Lakhimpur issued the impugned notice dated 19.09.2001 to the mem ber of the petitioner society to remove the crops, houses etc. forthwith from th e land occupied by the members of the petitioner society. In this writ petition the petitioner is praying for a direction to the c oncerned authority to consider the said application dated 02.09.97 and 18.03.98 of the petitioner for allotment of the said land in favour of the petitioner soc iety according to the relevant provisions of the settlement rules under the Assa m Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886. Taking into consideration of the submission of the learned counsel appea ring for the petitioner and also considering the available materials on record, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the learned Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur to consider and dispose of the said application dated 02.09.97 and 18 .03.98 filed by the petitioner society for allotment of the said plot of land in their favour according to the settlement rules under Assam Land and Revenue Reg ulation, 1886 as expeditiously as possible. Pending disposal of the said applications for allotment of the land, the petitioner shall not be evicted without following the due procedure of law. The writ petition is allowed to the extent mentioned above. (cid:29) I have heard Mr. P. Pathak, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms. K. Devi involved in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 and so also Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned Sr. counse l assisted by Mr. A.J. Das, learned counsel involved in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010. I have also heard Mr. N. Upadhya, learned State counsel. Mr. Pathak, learned counsel appearing in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 submits t hat although the land described in Annexure-4 and so also in Annexure-5 Chitha w as allotted in favour of the petitioner, but the possession thereof having not b een handed over to it, the purpose for which the land was allotted has not been materialised. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, the aforesaid fact of allotment of the land in favour of the petitioner has been admitted. However, i t has been stated that since the land was under encroachment, an Encroachment Ca se No. 8/2001 was registered by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur and eviction order was passed. According to the official respondents, the land is under encro achment of the members of the petitioner involved in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010. It h as also been stated that although eviction order was passed, but because of the interim order passed in the said writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010, the members of the petitioner society involved in the said case could not be evicte d. On the other hand, it is the case of the petitioner in the second writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010, that its members have not occupied the lan d that was allotted to the petitioner in the other writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) N o. 2811/2010, and that it is under occupation of another plot of land measuring 67 bighas as described in the above quoted order dated 06.02.2007 passed in W.P .(C) No. 917/2002. Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2 010 submits that there cannot be any objection, if a direction is issued toward s implementation of Annexure-4 allotment order dated 30.11.2000 described therei n which also finds mention in Anenxure-5 Chitha. However, he submits that while doing so, the land under occupation of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010 s hould not be disturbed. He further submits that the impugned order of rejection of allotment of land is not based on actual facts inasmuch the authority while d eciding the matter in terms of the above quoted order of this Court, did not tak e in to consideration that the petitioner and its members are in occupation of a nother plot of land and not the land belonging to the other writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010. So far as the official respondents are concerned, their stand in the mat ter is that the land already allotted to the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 could not be handed over as because there was encroachment on the part of the m embers of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010. As noted above, the said peti tioner has disputed the same by referring to the above quoted order and other do cuments annexed to the writ petition contending that the land under their occupa tion is altogether different than the one allotted by Annexure-4 order dated 30. 11.2000. From the above, what is seen is that the petitioner involved in the seco nd writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010, has disputed the claim of the offi cial respondents that because of encroachment on their part, the land earlier al lotted to the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 could not be given possession to. In view of the above, the following directions are issued. 1) The petitioner involved in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010 should be handed over a nd given possession of the land that was allotted in its favour by Annexure-4 or der dated 30.11.2000 about which there is also mention in Anenxure-5 Chitha anne xed to the writ petition. 2) As regards the claim of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5094/2010, the aut hority will consider its stand that it is not under occupation of the aforesaid land allotted in favour of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2811/2010, but in occup ation of another plot of land measuring 67 bighas as indicated in the above quot ed order which has also been shown in Annexure-5 Chitha. 3) Irrespective of the aforesaid exercise in respect of the direction No. 2 , as directed in direction No. 1, the petitioner involved in W.P.(C) No. 2811/20 10 shall be given possession of the land that was allotted in its favour by Anne xure-4 order 30.11.2000 which is also indicated in Anenxure-5 Chitha. Let the entire exercise is carried out as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. With the above directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of.