GUWAHATI, India, Sept. 17 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Aog. 19:

1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs:

"In the premises aforesaid, your humble petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records and issue a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why

(i) a writ in the nature of Certiorari should not be issued for interfering with and quashing he eviction notice dated 22/12/2022 issued by the respondent no. 3 /or

(ii) A writ in the nature of Mandamus should not be issued thereby commanding the respondent no.3 to rescind, recall and/or forbear from giving effect of the Impugned eviction notice dated 22/12/2022 issued by the respondent no.5 and/or

(iii) A writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No to restore the possession of the aforesaid land to the Petitioner Ante-Possession.

(iv) And on showing cause or causes and upon hearing the parties and perusal of records this Hon'ble court would be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/ or to pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper for dispensation of proper justice to the petitioner."

2. As per the facts projected, the petitioner claims to be in possession of a plot of land measuring 15 lechas covered by Dag No. 811 of town Kachalukhowa Kismat, Mouza-Town, District-Nagaon, Assam and is earning his livelihood by carrying on business since the year 1979. It is also averred that the respondent no. 3, namely, Nagaon Municipal Board had issued a Trade License allowing the petitioner to carry on his business and the Trade License was renewed from time to time. The Municipal Tax was also paid. The petitioner also claims to have made an application before the Addl. Deputy Commissioner on 18.05.2013 for recording his name in the Touzi Bahira Register by contending that he is in possession of the land since a long period of time and on the said application, a report was submitted by the Circle Officer on 04.07.2013. It is contended that the land in question is Government land where the petitioner is residing. The petitioner had thereafter made another application on 22.06.2022 with a prayer to make settlement of the land in his name and some inquiries were also made in this regard. It is the case of the petitioner that when there was a move to settle the land in his favour, the respondent no. 3, without service of notice had demolished the structures of the petitioner on 12.02.2023. The petitioner has also contended that though there was a notice dated 23.12.2022 issued by the respondent no. 3, the dag number was written as 8011 whereas the petitioner was in possession of a plot of land covered by Dag No. 811. The aforesaid action of evicting the petitioner is the subject matter of challenge and one of the prayers is to restore possession which has been extracted hereinabove.

3. I have heard Shri AC Sarma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri S Sutradhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri N Goswami, learned State Counsel, Assam as well as Shri SC Khound, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5, namely, Municipal Board and its Officers.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpNtuKHOgf8JctpcoDcXkEoerauGpb%2BFsDdXg3ndVvqkZ&caseno=WP(C)/1554/2023&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010053302023&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.