Kanauj Chakraborty & Ors. vs The State Of Assam & Ors.

Heard Mr. J. Abedin, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. H. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 3, 4 & 5.

The petitioners, four in nos., have joined together to institute the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that they have a common cause of action to espouse.

The petitioner no. 1 and the petitioner no. 2 are sons of one Late Kiran Chandra Chakraborty. The petitioner no. 3 is the wife of one Late Kalyan Chandra Chakraborty whereas the petitioner no. 4 is a son of Late Kalyan Chandra Chakraborty. Late Kalyan Chandra Chakraborty was the father-in-law of the petitioner no. 3 and the grandfather of the petitioner no. 4. Thus, they have stated that all the petitioners belong to the same family. It is further stated that Late Kiran Chandra Chakraborty owned two parcels of land measuring 7 Bighas 3 Kathas and 2 Bighas 2 Kathas, that is, 10 Bighas in total. The said two parcels of land are covered by Dag no. 87 and Dag no. 89 under Periodic Patta no. 8 and situate at Village – 2 No. Jukuta Kisamat, Mouza – Jarabari, Kampur Revenue Cirlce, District - Nagaon [‘the subject-plots’, for short].

The petitioners have stated that after the death of Late Kiran Chandra Chakraborty, the subject-plots are inherited by the petitioners and accordingly, their names stood mutated in the Revenue Records. The petitioners have stated that they have been paying land revenues regularly and jointly enjoying peaceful possession of the subject-plots, which are agricultural lands.

The petitioners have further stated that the petitioner no. 4 has been suffering from various ailments like right foot cellulitis, AKI with anemia, hypothyroidism, HTN, T2DM and hyponatremia for the last two years and for that, he has to undertake medical treatments regularly at different medical facilities. As per a Medical Certificate issued on 30.06.2026 annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-1, the petitioner no. 4 has been advised to take better and advanced treatment outside, preferably in Apollo Hospital at Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

It is averred by the petitioners that in order to meet the medical treatment expenditure of the petitioner no. 4, there emerged an urgent requirement of a substantial amount and in order to collect the required amount for the medical treatment expenditure of the petitioner no. 4, the petitioners decided to sell the subject-plots to an willing purchaser. One Sri Sariful Islam, a resident of Village 2 Nno. Jukuta, P.S. – Kachuwa, District – Nagaon came forward to purchase the subject-plots at an agreed sale consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/- per Bigha. Then, the petitioners executed an Agreement for sale of the subject-plots with the proposed purchaser on 24.06.2024 and till date, the proposed purchaser had paid an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-.

After execution of the Agreement for sale of the subject-plots and on receipt of the advance amount from the proposed purchaser, the petitioners through the petitioner no. 2, submitted an application online on 29.01.2026 in the designated portal, ‘Sewa Setu’ for delivery of the notified public service, ‘Composite Land Sale Transfer’ and the receipt of the said application was duly generated on 29.01.2026 vide Acknowledgment no. NOC/33/80024/2026. In the application acknowledgement, it was mentioned that if the application accepted by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, the service would be provided within forty-five days [excluding the time taken between issue of NoC and presentation of Sale Deed before the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar office] and the applicant could raise an appeal if the service was not delivered within forty-five days.

When despite elapse of the stipulated delivery date, the public service, sought for by the petitioners, was not extended, the petitioners submitted an application before the respondent no. 3 on 13.05.2026 requesting expeditious processing of the application as the petitioners were in need of money urgently for the medical treatment expenditure of the petitioner no. 4. The petitioners have come to learn that the respondent no. 5 has already submitted a Report on 18.06.2026 before the respondent no. 4 reporting that the subject-plots measuring 10 Bighas are found recorded in the name of the petitioners as pattadars and during field verification, it was found that the petitioners were in possession of the subject-plots. In the Report dated 18.06.2026, the respondent no. 5 has also reported about the reason for selling the subject-plots to the proposed purchaser and the Government Gaonbura had certified that the neighbours would not have any problem if the sale permission was granted.

Mr. Abedin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that since the service, ‘Composite Land Sale Transfer’ is a notified public service under the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 and in view of Section 21A of the Registration Act, 1908, as amended, it is incumbent on the part of the respondent authorities either to allow the application for the NOC for sale or to dispose of the application by way of a reasoned order within the prescribed delivery period. It is not open for the respondent authorities to keep the application pending for such prolonged period. He has further submitted that the even if the intended transfer is governed by the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP], notified by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam by a Notification dated 09.09.2025, the period of delivery of the notified public service is still thirty days, which is already long over.

The Registration Act, 1908 came to be amended by the Registration [Assam Amendment] Act, 2009 with the insertion of Section 21A and again by the Registration [Assam Amendment] Act, 2021. After those amendments, Section 21A of the Registration Act, 2009 reads as under :-

It is a statutory mandate under Section 21A of the Registration Act for the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner to either issue a No Objection Certificate containing the description of the immovable property to be transferred or to pass a speaking order with reasons thereof within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the application in case NOC is not issued within the prescribed period of thirty days.

The Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam has framed a Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] and the SOP has been notified vide a Notification dated 09.09.2025. The relevant excerpts from the Notification are quoted hereinunder :-

Both under Section 21A of the Registration Act, as amended, as well as in the SOP formulated by the State Government, by the Notification dated 09.09.2025, time period of thirty days from the date of application for processing of the application for issuance of the No Objection Certificate [NOC] has been prescribed.

The Assam Right to Public Services [ARPTS] Act, 2012 has been enacted by the Assam Legislative Assembly in order to provide for delivery of notified public services to the people of the State of Assam within the stipulated time limit and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. As per Section 2[h], 'Right to Public Service' means right to obtain the notified service under the ARTPS Act from time to time within the stipulated time limit as prescribed under Section 5. Section 5 of the ARTPS Act has laid down that every eligible person shall have the right to obtain the services in accordance with the ARTPS Act within the time bound period as notified under Section 4. It is the responsibility of the Designated Government Servant to deliver services, under Section 6 of the ARTPS Act, within the stipulated period. The stipulated time limit, as per Section 7[1], starts from the date when the application for obtaining a required notified service is submitted to the Designated Public Servant or to a person subordinate to him authorized to receive the application. As per Section 7[2], the Designated Public Servant on receipt of an application under sub-section [1] shall, within the stipulated time limit, provide the notified service or reject the application and in case of rejection of application, he shall record the reasons in writing and communicate to the person making the application, [i] the reasons for such rejection; [ii] the period within which an appeal against such rejection may be preferred; and [iii] the particulars of the Appellate Authority. An Order passed under Section 7[2] is an appealable order under Section 8 before the 1^st Appellate Authority notified by the State Government.

Section 4 of the ARTPS Act has provided that the State Government may, from time to time, notify the services, Designated Public Servants, Appellate Authorities, Reviewing Authorities, User Charge, Stipulated Time Limits, and the area of the State to which the Act shall apply.

The Notification dated 11.11.2022 is on the subject : ‘Declaration of Service under Revenue & DM Department as per provision of the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 in all Districts [except sixth scheduled Districts] of Assam’. The notification has been issued with a view to provide delivery of the following notified public service to eligible citizens within the stipulated time limit :-

The Notification has further provided for procedural steps to be followed by the authorities involved in providing the notified public services. As per the Citizen Charter annexed to the Notification as Annexure-I, for the notified public service, 'Composite Land Sale Transfer', the District Commissioner [earlier, Deputy Commissioner] or the authority to be nominated by the District Commissioner [earlier, Deputy Commissioner] is the Designated Public Servant and the stipulated time limit for providing the service is mentioned as forty-five days.

A speaking order is one which expressly states the reasons for the decision. In other words, a speaking order speaks for itself by assigning the reasons behind the conclusion. It is implicit in the principles of natural justice and fair play that an authority which has been vested with the statutory power to decide the matter should record reasons as it is part of fair procedure, more particularly, when the decision is likely to affect the person concerned. In the case in hand, the right of the applicant is also traceable to Article 300A of the Constitution. Though the right provided in Article 300A is not fundamental right, but it is still a constitutional and human right.

As per the eligible criteria mentioned in the Notification dated 11.11.2022, anyone whose name figures in Jamabandi [Records of Rights] or his/her legal heirs/successors or his/her registered power of attorney holder is eligible to avail the service, ‘Composite Land Sale Transfer’. The Notification dated 11.11.2022 has mentioned that the Designated Public Servant, ‘Deputy Commissioner/to be nominated by Deputy Commissioner’. The documents required to be submitted with the application are also listed in the Notification.

As the respondent authorities have not brought the processing of the application dated 29.01.2026 to a finality till date, despite elapse of more than seven months since 29.01.2026, this writ petition is disposed of directing the jurisdictional District Commissioner, Nagaon [the respondent no. 3] to bring the entire process to finality in strict compliance of the statutory prescriptions contained in Section 21 of the Registration Act, as amended, and by adhering to the procedure outlined in the Notification dated 11.11.2022 and the Notification dated 09.09.2025 within a period of thirty days from the date of submission of a copy of this order at his office by the petitioners.

With the observations made and the directions given above, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to cost.