Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Ratneswar Kalita – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Both the writ petitions are taken up for disposal vide the common judgment and order taking into account that the Petitioners in both the writ petitions are same and the issues arising out therein are interrelated.
2. The case of the 15 Petitioners in WP(C) 1767/2012 are that they claim that they have constructed their permanent as well as temporary houses in Dag Nos.459, 463, 589, 513, 526, 504, 468, 527, 528, 615, 544 and 548 respectively at Village-Dakhingaon (South Kalapahar) under Mouza-Beltola during the period from 1978 – 1985. The Petitioners claim that they have been living and enjoying their plots of land peacefully and paying the land revenue (Touzi Bahira) to the Revenue Authorities from time to time in respect of their land in occupation. It is further mentioned in the writ petition that the Petitioners’ houses were assessed by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and granted holding numbers. The Petitioners are also enjoying electricity connection on the basis of No Objection Certificates issued by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation.
3. It is the further case of the Petitioners that the Respondent authorities especially the Respondent Forest Authorities tried
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners did not have the right to be settled on the Ceiling Surplus land as they did not fulfill the conditions of landless cultivator....
State must ensure procedural fairness in eviction while engaging in individualized assessments for rehabilitation claims under applicable land policies.
Eviction notices under Rule 18 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations must afford petitioners an opportunity to demonstrate bona fide claims of right, adhering to principles of natural justice.
An application for government land settlement confers no vested right. Administrative authorities may consider subsequent material facts, such as the acquisition of private land, to determine eligibi....
The court upheld the eviction of unauthorized occupants from government land reserved for a public hospital but mandated a reassessment of rehabilitation claims for eligible indigenous and landless i....
The court ruled that eviction without a hearing violates the principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution.
Point of Law : Amended provisions of Rule 18 (2) of the Settlement Rules does not mandate issuance of any notice upon persons coming in the ambit of the said sub-rule. The petitioner are admittedly i....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
