Back
2005 Supreme(Gau) 277
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (ITANAGAR BENCH)
H.N. Sarma, J.
Tater Mite – Appellants
Vs.
State of Arunachal Pradesh and other – Respondent
WP (C) No. 230 (AP) 2004
Decided On: 01.04.2005
For Appellant/Plaintiff:T. Michi, B. Habung, H.R. Obing and G. Riba, Advocates
For Respondents/Defendant:B.L. Singh, Advocate
The importance of prior notice, adherence to principles of natural justice, and the unauthorized nature of the eviction order were central to the judgment.
Headnote:
EVICTION - Land Dispute - Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorzied Occupants) Act, 2003 - Section 2(ii), 2(iv), 4, 5, 11, 12, 21 - The court discussed the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorzied Occupants) Act, 2003, which defines Estate Officer, public premises, and provides for notice, eviction, appeals, and delegation of powers. The court highlighted the importance of prior notice, adherence to principles of natural justice, and the unauthorized nature of the eviction order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a permanent resident, inherited a plot of land and constructed a dwelling house. The Deputy Commissioner issued an eviction order claiming the land to be government property. The petitioner filed a writ petition to quash the eviction order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found lack of concrete evidence regarding the status of the land but focused on the legality and validity of the eviction order. It highlighted the unauthorized nature of the order and the violation of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises Act.
Issues: Dispute over the ownership of the land, legality of the eviction order, and the application of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of prior notice, adherence to principles of natural justice, and the unauthorized nature of the eviction order. It also highlighted the violation of the Arunachal Pradesh Public Premises Act.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, quashing the impugned eviction order, with no order as to costs.
H.N. Sarma, J.
1. The necessary fact leading to the institution of this writ petition inter alia is that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Daporijo near Petrol Pump in the District of Upper Subansiri Arunachal Pradesh. The Petitioner inherited a plot of land measuring 220 sq. meters from his father, which is bounded by on the North Private residence, on the South-Road, on the East - PWD Store and on the West Private residence. The Petitioner constructed his dwelling house and is residing there with his family. The Petitioner is residing in the suit land by inheriting the same from his father in the year 1989. While the Petitioner was so enjoying the aforesaid land, the Deputy Commissioner, Daporijo issued an eviction order being No. LM/DRJ-18/03-04 (VOL-V) dated 21.05.04 (26.05.04) directing the Petitioner to evict from the illegal OBT construction made by him which is inside the PWD Govt. quarter, opposite to Petrol Pump with the help of police on 02.06.04. It is also stated in the said order that, Sri N. Makcha, EAC (Estt.) has been designated as the Estate Officer to carry out the verification/removal of any illegal/unauthorized construction on govt. Land by private individual till further order. The contention of the Petitioner is that the said land over which the Petitioner has the OBT structure in front of the Petrol Pump is purely private land and at no point of time the same was acquired by the Government or it pertained the character of government land in any manner and accordingly, the aforesaid notice is totally unauthorized, illegal and arbitrary. The further case of Petitioner is that, he has applied for a land possession certificate to the Government in respect of the said land which was also in the process. In the aforesaid premises, the Petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for quashing of the impugned eviction order dated 21.05.04 (26.05.04).
2. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 denying the contentions raised by the Petitioner. In the said affidavit-in-opposition it is inter alia stated that the land in question is just in the vicinity of the government PWD Quarter at Daporijo and the Petitioner encroached the same in connivance with the occupants of the nearby quarter and the Petitioner has illegally constructed the OBT house within the said public premises from which he is liable to be evicted. It is further stated therein that, the Petitioner is not entitled to get any land possession certificate in as much as the land in question being the Government land, no such certificate can be issued in favour of a private individual.
3. I have heard Mr. T. Michi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and also heard Mr. B.L. Singh, learned Senior Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh on behalf of the Respondents and considered the rival contentions made by the parties. From the pleadings of the parties, two different sets of factual situation emerge in this case. One is that the Petitioner claims the land in question to be his ancestral property, whereas the Respondents claimed it to be the government land. There is lack of sufficient materials before the Court to come to a concrete finding as to the status of the land in question i.e. whether it is a private land or government land. Without going into that matter, it is now necessary to consider the legality and validity of the action of the Respondents challenged in this writ petition.
4. The impugned order dated 21.05.04 (26.05.04) validity of which is challenged in this writ petition, is quoted herein below:
Memo No. LM/DRJ-18/03-04 (Vol-V) Dated.
Daporijo, the 26.5.2004.
ORDER
Shri N Makcha, EAC (Estt) DCs Office is hereby designated as an Estate Officer to carry out the verification/removal of any illegal/unauthorized construction on govt. Land by private individual till further order.
Thereafter, Shri N. Makacha, EAC/designated Estate Officer of this Office is hereby ordered to evict the ille
