Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J.

1. Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the state respondents. None appears for the respondent No. 1. By an order dated 13.05.2011, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had been struck off from the array of respondents. The father of the petitioners, namely, Prabhat Rangpi was an occupancy tenant under Md. Hussain, Son of late Dhan Mahamad, who was the landlord in respect of a cultivable land measuring 4 Bighas of KP Patta No. 100 of Dag No. 14(Old)/703(New) of Village Pamohi under Ramcharani Mouza in the Kamrup (Metro) District.

2. On the death of Prabhat Rangpi, the present petitioners are the occupancy tenants. During his lifetime, Prabhat Rangpi, being the occupancy tenant under the Assam (Temporarily Settled Areas) Act, 1971 and the Rules framed thereunder, had paid the regular chukani to the landlord Md. Hussain. Chukani is 1/5th of the products of the land cultivated by the occupancy tenant. The occupancy tenant was also allotted with ryoti khatinan No. 54. It is stated that the said khatian is still in force and the khatian was also duly published in the Assam Gazette.

3. On the death of the occupancy tenant Prabhat Rangpi, his two sons being the present writ petitioners had applied for a mutation on inheritance in respect of the ryoti rights. The competent authority upon completion of all formalities, by following due procedure of law, had granted mutation in favour of the present petitioners on 19.08.1995 and thereafter, by deleting the name of Prabhat Rangpi, the names of the petitioners were entered in the ryoti khatian on 08.07.1997. It is stated that upon inheritance, the present petitioners have also been paying the chukani to the landlord in the same manner as was earlier paid by their predecessor-in-interest Prabhat Rangpi.

4. A relevant fact is that one Bahar Ali, being the present respondent No. 1 had purchased the concerned plot of land, from the landlord Md. Hussain through a registered sale deed No. 4936 dated 15.05.69. Upon such purchase, the respondent No. 1 Bahar Ali got his name mutated and the related jamabandi was also corrected. In view of the change of landlord, the present writ petitioners upon inheriting the ryoti right from their father Prabhat Rangpi, have been paying the required chukani to the new landlord being the respondent No. 1, Bahar Ali.

5. In the aforesaid factual background, the present writ petitioners submitted an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, Guwahati in the year 1995 by which, the petitioners claimed a right of ownership over the ryoti land under Section 23 of the Assam (Temporarily Settled Areas) Tenancy Act, 1971, (hereinafter referred as the Tenancy Act, 1971). The said application was registered as Case No. 66/1995, which was decided by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, Guwahati vide order dated 29.9.95.

6. In the order dated 29.09.95, the Addl. Deputy Commissioner considered the fact that the predecessor-in-interest of the writ petitioners namely, Prabhat Rangpi was issued the final ryoti khatian No. 54, in respect of his ryoti rights over the land in question, which was subsequently acquired by the present writ petitioners on inheritance. Accordingly, the Addl. Deputy Commissioner arrived at a conclusion that the present petitioners are eligible for the ownership right over the land. It was provided that the petitioners would acquire the ownership right over 4 Bighas of the land of K.M. Patta No. 100 Dag No. 703 of Pamohi village under Ramcharani Mouza, on payment of compensation amounting to Rs. 146/-, as assessed under Section 24 of the Tenancy Act, 1971 being 50 times of the revenue payable by the ryot to the owner of the land.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners had deposited the amount of Rs. 146/- by way of treasury chalan in the State Bank of India, Guwahati Branch under head of Account No. 8443 Revenue Department. Aga