Hasena Bewa And 10 Ors vs The State Of Assam And 8 Ors

GAHC010137562022 2026:GAU-AS:11730

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4643/2022

R/O VILL.- BECHIMARI, P.S.- FAKIRAGRAM, DIST.- KOKRAJHAR, BTR, ASSAM. 2: MOFIDA BEGUM

BTR ASSAM. 3: HAFIZUL SK

BTR ASSAM. 4: ROFIZUL SK

BTR ASSAM. 5: ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE

BTR ASSAM. 6: ISHAUDDIN AHMED

BTR ASSAM. 7: CHAFIKUL HUSSAIN

BTR ASSAM. 8: AL AMAM SK

BTR ASSAM. 9: NURUL HOQUE

BTR ASSAM. 10: HAYET ALI

BTR ASSAM. 11: SAYET ALI

BTR ASSAM VERSUS

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL REGION

BTR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 3:THE SECRETARY REVENUE BTR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BTR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 5:THE ADD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) BTR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 6:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER BTR KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 7:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

BTR

ASSAM. 8:RENU BALA DAS

BTR ASSAM. 9:BASANTI DAS

BTR ASSAM BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M. U. Mahmud, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. K. Sen, Advocate : Ms. M. Barman, Jr. GA, Assam : Ms. B. Bora, SC, BTC · Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A · Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 17.08.2026 · Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : Yes · Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : N/A Heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Ms. M. Barman, the learned Junior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State Respondents. I have also heard Ms. B. Bora, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the BTC and Mr. B. K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9.

The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners challenging the notice dated 19.04.2022 whereby the Circle Officer, Dotma Revenue Circle has issued a communication to the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 that the encroachers of Dag No.164 and Dag No.131 of village Magurmari would be evicted in favour of MNP/TB holders (MNP/TB No.5 and MNP/TB No.11) on 27.04.2022.

Mr. M. U. Mahmud, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that their predecessors-in-interest have purchased two plots of land by registered Deeds of Sale which are Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Without commenting on the legality or validity of the Deeds of Sale, this Court finds it relevant to observe that the schedule mentioned in the typed copy Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 shows that the lands in question pertain to Dag No.128 of Khatian No.2 situated at Dihi Fakiragram, Magurmari Seat and Dag No.135 of Myadi Patta No.1 at Revenue Village Magurmari. The reference of these Sale Deeds in the writ petition has however no relevance to the impugned notice dated 19.04.2022 inasmuch as, the impugned notice refers to Dag No.164 and Dag No.131. This Court further takes note of the report which was submitted by the BTC by filing an affidavit on 11.05.2026 wherein it is seen that Dag No.164 is a Government Khas Land admeasuring 1 Bigha 3 Kathas 6 Lechas wherein one Smti. Basanti Das, wife of Ratan Das and the predecessors-in-interest of the Petitioners were in possession to the extent of 1 Bigha and 3 Kathas 6 Lechas respectively.

This Court has also taken note of the submission of Mr. B. K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 and submitted that in respect of Dag No.164 and Dag No.165, the Respondents have been granted 1 Bigha each under the MNP Scheme and they are in possession upon being handed over in the year 2022.

Taking into account that the Petitioners have not been able to substantiate any material before this Court that they have any conceivable right in respect of Dag No.164 and Dag No.131 of village Magurmari, it is the opinion of this Court that the Petitioners cannot sustain a challenge to the impugned notice dated 19.04.2022.

This Court also takes note of that the Petitioners have also sought from the Respondent Authorities the sketch map/trace map and Jamabandi of the land admeasuring 1 Bighas 3 Kathas 19 Lechas covered by Myadi Patta No.1 of Dag No.135, Khatian No.2 and Dag No.128 of Revenue Village Magurmari and the same have not been provided to the Petitioners.

Mr. M. U. Mahmud, the learned counsel submitted that in view of the Deeds of Sale which have been enclosed in Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 to the writ petition, the Petitioners have a right to seek the trace map as well as the Jamabandi of the said lands. It is the opinion of this Court that if the Petitioners apply for the copy of the Jamabandi as well as the sketch map/trace map of the land admeasuring 1 Bighas 3 Kathas 19 Lechas covered by Myadi Patta No.1 of Dag No.135 at Revenue Village Magurmari as well as the land admeasuring 1 Bigha covered by Dag No.128 of Khatian No.2 situated at village Magurmari, Kokrajhar, the Petitioners should be issued the trace map as well as the Jamabandi upon payment of the prescribed fees.

Accordingly, the writ petition therefore stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:

This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice dated 19.04.2022 for the reasons already aforementioned.

The Respondent Authorities more particularly the Respondent Nos. 5 and 7 upon application made by the Petitioners for the copy of the trace map as well as the Jamabandi of land admeasuring 1 Bigha 3 Kathas 19 Lechas covered by Myadi Patta No.1 of Dag No.135 at Revenue Village Magurmari as well as the land admeasuring 1 Bigha covered by Dag No.128 of Khatian No.2 situated at village Magurmari, Kokrajhar, shall provide the trace map as well as the Jamabandi in respect to the said land upon payment of the prescribed fee.

The directions at Clause (ii) of the instant paragraph be complied with by the Respondent Nos. 5 and 7 upon submission of the application(s) complete in all respects along with the prescribed fee, within a period of 2 (two) months therefrom.

Bijoy ^{by Bijoy Saha} Saha ^{17:16:24 +05'30'}