✦ Gauhati High Court · 02 Jun 2026

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

KARDAK ETE3 min read

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

The writ petition stands disposed of, in terms above

Key paragraphs

  • Para 77. The writ petition stands disposed of, in terms above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Judgment

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE Date : 02-06-2026 ORDER Heard Mr. H. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. H. Sarma, learned State Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3. Page No.# 4/5

2.

Considering the simple nature of the prayer made in this writ petition and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is taken up and disposed of at the admission stage.

3.

The petitioners, 11 (eleven) in numbers, by filing this writ petition have prayed for a simple direction to the respondent authorities to dispose of the application dated 18.03.2023, submitted by them, in respect of the land measuring 6.09 acre (16 Bigha) covered by Dag No.238(0)/218(n) under Taluk No.15691/104 of Mohammad Kabir, Final Khatian No.102 of Mouza-Khagail, Ph-Eagarsati within Nilambazar Revenue Circle, in the Karimganj District, presently Sribhumi District.

4.

The petitioners, who claim to be the surviving legal heirs of late Kurshid Ali, S/o Lt. Anfor Ali; late Sabbir Ahmed, S/o Lt. Abdul Kadir; late Ataur Rahman, S/o Lt. Abdul Kadir; late Ibrahim Ali, S/o Lt. Jalal Uddin; late Abdul Kadir, S/o Lt. Arzid Ali; and late Suna Mia, S/o Lt. Katu Mia, state that their grandfathers were in occupation and possession of the land measuring 6.09 acre (16 Bigha) covered by Dag No.238(0)/218(n) under Taluk No.15691/104 of Mohammad Kabir, Final Khatian No.102 of Mouza-Khagail, Ph-Eagarsati, in the erstwhile District of Cachar, then under Karimganj District and now Sribhumi District. It is stated that the said predecessors were recorded as Rayot under Khatian No.102.

5.

According to the petitioners, they inherited the subject land after the demise of their fathers and grandfathers. The petitioners applied for inclusion of their names in the Khatian; however, the respondent authorities, without considering the grievance of the petitioners regarding recording of their names, recorded the subject land as Khas land. It is the Page No.# 5/5 contention of the petitioners that they have right to have their names recorded in the revenue records in accordance with the provisions of the Assam State Acquisition of Zamindaries Act, 1951, which was applicable in the erstwhile District of Cachar. Therefore, they submit that their application dated 18.03.2023 may be directed to be considered and disposed of.

6.

Having considered the simple nature of the prayer made by the petitioners for disposal of their application for recording their names in the revenue records in terms of the applicable provisions of law and as agreed to by the learned counsels for the respondents, Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue Department and Mr. H. Sarma, learned State Counsel, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioners to file an application before the District Commissioner, Sribhumi District, within a period of 20 (twenty) days from today. On receipt of the application, the District Commissioner, Sribhumi District, shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law, within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of the application.

Operative part

7.

The writ petition stands disposed of, in terms above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition stands disposed of, in terms above

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Assam State Acquisition of Zamindaries Act, 1951.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Gauhati High Court, on 02 Jun 2026. The bench was KARDAK ETE.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Gauhati High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments