Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned State counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 and Mr. S.N. Tamuli, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6. Notice to respondent No. 5 was sent on 19.09.2014 by registered post with A/D. There is office note, dated 11.11.2014, indicating that neither the A/D card nor the notice with "un-served" remark has been received back. Respondent No. 5 is the President of Karunabari Anchalik Panchayat (hereinafter referred to as the Anchalik Panchayat).

2. Having regard to the period of time that has elapsed from the date of despatch of notice to respondent No. 5 by registered post with A/D, service of notice on respondent No. 5 is deemed to be complete.

3. The case was partly heard on 24.02.2015. However, no order, inadvertently, was passed with regard to the service of notice on respondent No. 5 and, therefore, to-day it is recorded that notice on respondent No. 5 is deemed to have been served.

4. Mr. Talukdar has produced the records relating to the settlement process by the Anchalik Panchayat as well by the Lakhimpur Zilla Parishad (hereinafter