- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 18 July 2023
- Bench
- Kalyan Rai Surana
- Case no.
- WP(C) 5167/2014
Judgment
ORDER Date : 18-07-2023 Heard Mr. N. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. M. Chutia, learned Government Advocate for respondent nos. 2 and 3. None appears on call for PNRD representing respondent no. 1 and 4.
¶2In so far as the respondent no. 5 is concerned, it is seen that although Page No.# 2/4 order to take steps on respondent no. 5 was passed on 26.09.2014 but steps was issued under memo No. 5148 dated 17.11.2014. As per A/D Card, the notice was served on 22.11.2014, which is beyond the returnable date. Therefore, service upon respondent no. 5 cannot be deemed to be duly served.
¶3In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of fresh notice upon respondent no. 5 is dispensed with.
¶4The petitioner claims that a shop consisting of 4(four) rooms was constructed under the Panchayat scheme and in the year 1998, the then Secretary of Bardubatup Gaon Panchayat had handed over the possession of the shop premises to the petitioner. The respondent no. 5, who was the then President of the Gaon Panchayat issued a notice to the petitioner to vacate the shop premises and being aggrieved by the said notice, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
¶5In this writ petition, there is no statement to reflect that the Gaon Panchayat had issued a public notice indicating their intention to give out/allot shops on lease. There is also no statement regarding any agreement of the Panchayat with the petitioner to hand over the possession the shop of the petitioner. The petitioner has also not disclosed the rent which was agreed to be paid to the Bardubatup Gaon Panchayat. Rather, the petitioner has set up a case that the respondent no. 5 had illegally prepared the bills of a sum of Rs. 150/-, Rs.1503/-, Rs. 1670/- and Rs. 1670/- which was illegally deposited in the Bank Account of the father of the petitioner.
¶6Under such circumstances, the Court does not find that the petitioner has been able to show any legal and/or vested right to occupy the shop rooms in Page No.# 3/4 respect of which the notice of eviction has been issued. From the materials available, it cannot be held that the petitioner was allotted the shop rooms on rental basis, or otherwise handed over on the strength of a valid or lawful agreement.
¶7Therefore, the petitioner has miserably failed to establish any legal and/or vested right to occupy the shop in question. Hence, Court does not find this is a fit case to interfere with the impugned direction/notice No. BGP.01/2013-14/Mis/22 dated 14.05.2013. Accordingly, the Court is disinclined/not inclined to interfere with the said impugned notice.
¶8Be that as it may, the petitioner, if so advised, may file his written reply against the impugned notice dated 14.05.2013 before the President/Secretary Bardubatup Gaon Panchayat within a period of 15 days from today along with the certified copy of this order. Thereafter, the President/Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In the event, the petitioner fails to file any reply, he would be doing so at his own risk as to consequences arising from such non-filing.
¶9The learned Government Advocate shall also transmit the order passed to the Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon (respondent no. 2) so that the order can be communicated to the concerned Gaon Panchayat.
¶10The writ petition stands dismissed.
¶11The interim order passed on 26.09.2014 stands vacated.
JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010016132014 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5167/2014 ANUKUL BARMAN S/O UPENDRA BARMAN, R/O BARDUBATUP, P.O. BHURAGAON, P.S. BHURAGAON, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEV., DISPUR, GHY-6 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.N HAQUE Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.