Yadvendra Bahadur Singh v. The State of Assam and 6 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)

¶1Heard Mr. PK Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue and Ms. U Das, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam.

¶2The petitioner is a society registered under Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 2007. The petitioner claims that it is in possession of 1200 Bighas of Government Page No.# 3/5 khas land covered by Dag No. 1 of village Manadpur since 1992. According to the petitioner the said land is fit for cultivation of tea and rubber.

¶3The Assistant Settlement Officer, Udarbond Revenue Circle, Silchar also submitted a report along with a communication dated 10.03.2014 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar opining that the hillock covering more or less 1200 Bighas of land under second RS Dag No. 1 of Mouza of Mahmadpur, Udarbond revenue circle is fit for special cultivation like tea/ rubber.

¶4The case of the petitioner is that even after such recommendation and opinion of the settlement officer, nothing has been done till date for allotment of the said land in favour of the petitioner by the competent authority.

¶5The respondent No. 4 has also filed an affidavit in the present writ proceeding and has taken a stand that the proposal for allotment of the land in question was sent to the Government in Revenue and Disaster Management (Settlement Department) on 29.04.2015 and the said proposal was placed before the State Level Land Advisory Committee and the said committee in its meeting held on 18.11.1992 resolved to authorise the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar to approve the proposal, if the society is found to be a registered organization and that no proposal for allotment in case of individual should be considered.

¶6The Deputy Secretary of the Revenue and Disaster Management Department has filed an affidavit, whereby a stand has been taken that certain procedures are to be followed for allotment of the land in terms of the extant Page No.# 4/5 land policy. According to the aforesaid affidavit, the SDLAC is to make recommendation strictly in accordance with the land policy and thereafter, it should be placed before the competent authority to take a decision on allotment of land as per land policy.

¶7In the aforesaid backdrop, this court is of the considered opinion that no writ of mandamus can be issued directing settlement of the land in favour of the petitioner inasmuch as such settlement shall depend upon the extant norms and land policy of the State.

¶8The original recommendation of SDLAC relates back to the year 2014 and in the meantime there are changes in the land policy of the Government. Therefore, at this stage, this court is of the view that the entire matter can be disposed of by relegating the matter to the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department to take a call on the application of the petitioner so far relating to the settlement of the land.

¶9Accordingly, it is directed that the case of the petitioner be considered by the aforesaid authority in terms of the extant norms and land policy and the procedure prescribed by the State. Such exercise shall be carried out within a period of 12 (twelve) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioner before the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department.

¶10While parting with this record, it is made clear that this court has not Page No.# 5/5 opined anything on the merit of the claim of the petitioner or of the State. The claim of the petitioner be considered in terms of extant norms and procedure without being influenced by any of the observation made in this order.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010056032021 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/2131/2021ooooooooo YADVENDRAoBAHADURoSINGHo S/OoLATEoINDRAoBAHADURoSINGH,oR/OoITKHOLA,oP.O.oANDoP.S.oSILCHAR,o DIST.oCACHAR,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo6oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFo ASSAM,oDEPTT.oOFoREVENUEoANDoDISASTERoMANAGEMENT,oDISPUR,o GUWAHATIo6 2:THEoJOINToSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oDEPTT.oOFoREVENUEoANDoDISASTERoMANAGEMENTo(S) oDISPUR oGUWAHATIo6 3:THEoDEPUTYoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oDEPTT.oOFoREVENUEo(SETTLEMENT)oDISPUR oGUWAHATIo6 4:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oCACHAR oSILCHAR oDIST.oCACHAR oASSAM. 5:THEoADDL.oDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oCACHAR Page No.# 2/5 SILCHAR ASSAM. 6:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER CACHAR AND HAILAKANDI DIST. SILCHAR ASSAM. 7:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER UDHARBOND CIRCLE SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R DHAR Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY For the Petitioner : Mr. PK Deka, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. U Das, Advocate Mr. J Handique, Advocate Date of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date of Judgment : 23.07.2024