JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. T.J. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. P.R. Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue & Disaster Management Department for the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3; and Mr. M. Chetia, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 4, 5 & 6.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to correct the revenue records in respect of a plot of land measuring 4 Bighas 10 Lessas, covered by Dag no. 1071[O]/280[N] and Patta no. 290, located at Revenue Village - Betkuchi, Mouza – Beltola, District – Kamrup [M] [‘the subject-plot’, for short].

3. The petitioner has projected that in the year 1961, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Kamrup, by an order dated 18.10.1961, granted allotment/settlement of the subject-plot in favour of Late Rama Kanta Sarma i.e. the father of the petitioner. The father of the petitioner duly paid the premium amount, determined by the State respondents for the subject-plot, to the State respondents. Thereafter, in the draft chitha prepared for the year 1957-1964, the receipt of the premium amount in respect of the subject-plot was duly recorded. As per the draft chitha, the subject-plot was converted to Miyadi Patta land from Government land by creating a new Dag no. 280 and Khiraj Periodic Patta no. 280 out of the original Dag no. 1071. It is the case of the petitioner that the father of the petitioner was in continuous occupation of the subject-plot till his death and after his death, the same has been under occupation and possession of the family members of the petitioner. The petitioner was under the impression that as the premium for the subject-plot was duly paid as far back as in the year 1961, the revenue records would reflect the name of the petitioner. But when the petitioner checked the revenue records after the death of his father, it came to his knowledge that the status of the subject-plot in the revenue records has not yet been corrected by the respondent authorities. Having come to learn about the said position, the petitioner had preferred an application before the respondent no. 5 on 17.03.2022 seeking correction in respect of the subject-plot in the revenue records with insertion the petitioner’s name in place of his deceased father’s name. The respondent no. 5 though called for a report from the respondent no. 6, no progress seemed to have taken in respect of the petitioner’s application seeking mutation in his name against the subject-plot in place of his deceased father’s name.

4. The Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 [‘the Act’, for short] 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. The Act received the assent of the Governor of Assam on 27.04.2012 and was notified by a notification dated 02.05.2012. The Act has been published in the Assam Gazette in its issue dated 02.05.2012. As per Section 2[h], “Right to Public Service” means right to obtain the notified service under the Act from time to time within the stipulated time limit as described under Section 5 and as per Section 2[i], “notified service” means any service notified by the State Government under Section 4. Section 5 of the Act has laid down that every eligible person shall have the right to obtain the services in accordance with the Act within the time bound period as notified under Section 4. It is liability of the Government Servant to deliver services, under Section 6 of the Act, within the stipulated period. The stipulated time limit, as per Section 7[1], starts from the date when the application for obtaini