Smti Sutopa Bhowmik and 44 Ors v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

O R D E R

28.09.2023 The instant writ petition has been filed by 45 petitioners challenging the notice issued to petitioner No.27 under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupancy) Act, 1971 (for short, 'the Act of 1971'). Page No.# 5/7

¶2It is the case of the other petitioners that they apprehend that they would also be issued similar notices as was done in the case of the petitioner No.27, and as such, have filed the instant writ petition challenging the notice dated 28.08.2015 issued to the petitioner No.27 and for a further direction that the respondents should not take any steps for eviction of the petitioners without disposing of the earlier eviction proceedings initiated against them under the Act of 1971. The petitioners have also sought for a direction upon the State respondents to settle the land in favour of the petitioners.

¶3Upon filing of the instant writ petition, this Court vide an order dated

21.09.2015 issued notice and further directed that the respondents shall not disturb the possession of the petitioner in Dag No.498 at Tarapur, Silchar. The said interim order has been operating since then till date.

¶4This Court has duly perused the materials on record and enquired with the learned counsel for the petitioners as to whether the issuance of the notice under Section 4 of the Act of 1971 upon the petitioner No.27 is without jurisdiction. Nothing substantial could be submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners to show that the issuance of notice to the petitioner No.27 was without jurisdiction.

¶5This Court has also taken note of that other petitioners have approached this Court merely on apprehension that they would be also issued notices under Section 4 of the Act of 1971. This Court makes it clear that as per Section 4 of the Act of 1971, the Estate Officer has the authority and jurisdiction to issue notice if the said land comes within the purview of 'public premises'. As per the definition of public premises as mentioned in Section 2 (e) of the Act of 1971, it would also include land and in the instant case the Railway land. Page No.# 6/7

¶6Under such circumstances, it is the opinion of this Court that the Estate Officer, N. F. Railways, Lumding would be within its jurisdiction to issue notice in respect to a Railway land. Consequently, the filing of the instant writ petition by the petitioners challenging the notice issued to the petitioner No.27 dated 28.08.2015 and apprehending that the petitioners may also be evicted by issuance of similar notice is totally misconceived for which the instant writ petition stands dismissed.

¶7This Court further finds it relevant to take note of that there a further prayer in the writ petition that the State Authorities should be directed to grant allotment to the petitioners. The cause of action against the Railway Authorities and the cause of action against the Revenue Authority are completely distinct and different. Under such circumstances, the instant writ petition ought not to have been filed joining both the cause of actions.

¶8Be that as it may, the question of issuance of a direction to the State Authorities to settle the land in favour of the petitioner cannot be directed by the Court in as much as settling of a land depends upon the varied consideration and the discretion of the Government.

¶9Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to issue any direction to the State Authorities to settle the land in favour of the petitioners. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the respondent Revenue Authorities, if so advised.

¶10Before concluding, this Court finds it relevant to observe that as the petitioners had approached this Court directly, the petitioner No.27 did not submit the reply to the notice dated 28.08.2015. This Court grants the petitioner No.27, 15 (fifteen) days time from today to submit her show cause reply to the impugned notice dated 28.08.2015 before the Estate Officer, N.F. Page No.# 7/7 Railways, Lumding.

¶11The interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/7 GAHC010028212022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooCaseoNo.:oWP(C)/5866/2015 SMTIoSUTOPAoBHOWMIKoando44oORS W/OoLT.oSWAPANoBHOWMIK 2:oSRIoBIoDHANoDEBoNATH S/OoLT.oSURESHoCH.oDEBoNATH o3:oSHRIoSHANKARoROY S/OoLT.oJOTINDRAoROY o4:oSMTI.oPRATIMAoBHATTACHARJEE W/OoSHRIoBIBHASHoBHATTACHARJEE. o5:oSHRIoBIPLOBoPURKAYASTHA S/OoLT.oSATYENDRAoPURKAYASTHA o6:oSMTI.oSWAPNAoBHATTACHARJEE W/OoLATEoBISWAJIToBHATTACHARJEE. o7:oSHRIoSUBHASHoCH.oSUTRAoDHAR S/OoLT.oSUDHAMoSUTRAoDHAR. o8:oSMTI.oGITAoDASGUPTA W/O.oLT.oGOPIKAoRN.oDASGUPTA o9:oANJALIoBHATTACHARJEE W/OoLT.oBIVEKANANDAoBHATTACHARJEE o10:oSMTI.oNANDITAoBHATTACHARJEE W/OoLT.oBIJOYoKR.oBHATTACHARJEE. o11:oSMTI.oPURABIoDHAR W/OoLT.oGIRINDRAoNATHoDHAR PageoNo.#o2/7 o12:oSHRIoBISHNUoNATH S/OoLT.oRAMENoNATH o13:oMISS.oKAMALAoPANDIT D/OoLT.oSUNACHANDoPANDIT o14:oSHRIoKRIPESHoRANJANoAYAN S/OoLT.oKETAKIoRN.oAYAN o15:oSHRIoKALYANoCHAKRABORTY S/OoLT.oKARUNAoMOYoCHAKRABORTY o16:oSMTI.oHIRANYAoBALAoDEBoNATH S/OoLT.oJOGESHoCHANDA o17:oSHRIoJADANoCHAND S/OoLT.oJUGESHoCHANDA. o18:oSHRIoAMALENDUoCHAKRABORTY S/OoLT.oAMARENDRAoCHAKRABORTY o19:oSHRIoJOYDEEPoCHOUDHURY S/OoLT.oRANJIToKR.oCHOUDHURY o20:oSMTI.oSUSHMITAoDAS W/OoLT.oGOURANGAoCH.oDAS o21:oSMTI.oSHEFALIoDAS W/OoCHITTARANJANoDAS o22:oSHRIoAVIJIToDHAR S/OoLT.oADHIRoCH.oDHAR o23:oSMTI.oSWAPNAoCHANDA W/OoLT.oBENUoCHANDA. o24:oSMTI.oREKHAoCHAKRABORTY W/OoLT.oDURGADASoCHAKRABORTY o25:oSMTI.oRAMAoCHAKRABORTY W/OoLT.oRAMAPADAoCHAKRABORTY o26:oSMTI.oPURNIMAoCHAKRABORTY W/OoLT.oSATISHoCHAKRABORTY o27:oSMTI.oKALPANAoACHARJEE W/OoLT.oMAKHANoACHARJEE PageoNo.#o3/7 o28:oSMTI.oDIPTIoDEB W/OoLT.oNIRANJANoDEB o29:oSMTI.oFALGUNIoBHATTACHARJEE @oSWAPNAoBHATTACHARJEEoW/OoLT.oPRABHASHoBHATTACHARJEE. o30:oSHRIoSAMBHUoDUTTA S/OLT.oSACHINDRAoMOHANoDUTTA o31:oSMTI.oMILONoNATH W/OoLT.oRABINDRAoKR.NATH o32:oSHRIoSUDHIRoKR.oNATH S/OLT.oABHOYoCHARANoNATH o33:oSMTI.oSHUKLAoDEB W/OoLT.oJAGADISHoDEB o34:oSHRIoRADHAGOBINDAoDEB S/OoLT.oRATANMONIoDEB o35:oSHYAMALoDEB S/OLT.oNITAIoDEB o36:oGAYATRIoMAHAPATRA D/OoLT.oUPENDRAoMAHAPATRA o37:oAPARNAoCHOUDHURY W/OoLT.oGOPALoCHOUDHURY o38:oMAHAMAYAoDUTTA W/OoLT.oGYANENDRAoDUTTA o39:oPRATIVAoROY W/OLT.oHIMANGSHUoROY o40:oGOURIoROY W/OoLT.oJAYANTAoROY o41:oSATHIoROY W/OoLT.oHARIDASoROY o42:oDILIPoBHATTACHARJEE S/OoLToRAKESHoCH.oBHATTACHARJEE o43:oSMTI.oNIRUPAMAoDAS W/OoLT.oBINESHoCH.oDAS Page No.# 4/7 44: ASHIT ROY S/O LT. HARIDAS ROY 45: TARAK BANDHU DEB NATH S/O LT. ANANDA DEB NATH ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF TARAPUR SILCHAR ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DISPUR GUWAHATI-5. 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CACHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM. 3:N.F. RAILWAY REP. BY G.M. RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI. 4:THE ESTATE OFFICER NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY LAMDING. For the petitioner (s) : Mr. P. K. Roy, Sr. Advocate Mr. S. K. Chakraborty, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Mr. S. C. Biswas, Advocate BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH