IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that eviction without a hearing violates the principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

(Devashis Baruah, J.)

Heard Ms. BS Goyal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. R. Borpujari, learned counsel appears on behalf of the Revenue Department, Government of Assam and Mr. D. Nath, the learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

2. Two hundred and seven writ petitioners have joined together to file the present writ petition challenging the eviction process initiated by the Circle Officer, Dhekiajuli Revenue Circle by issuance of eviction notices to them all dated 15.11.2021. In addition to that, the petitioners have also sought for a direction that the land under their possession should be settled by the respondent authorities in terms with the Assam Land Policy, 2019 on the ground that the petitioners are indigenous landless persons entitled to settlement.

3. From a perusal of the writ petition, it is seen, more particularly, at paragraph Nos. 4 and 7 that only details have been given, in so far as the petitioner Nos. 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9 and 10, but the writ petition is, otherwise, silent in respect to the credentials of the other writ petitioners. It is further seen that in Annexure-A series and Annexure-B series to the writ petition Voter Cards as well as NRC extracts have been enclosed. This Court has duly perused the Annexure-A Voter cards, wherein addresses have been duly mentioned of the respective petitioners. However, it is seen that it is only in respect of some of the petitioners it has been shown that their addresses are at Chitalmari Non-K. It is further noticed that from Annexure-B which are extracts of the NRC, wherein some of the petitioners are shown as residents of village Chitalmari Non-K. This Court has also taken note of Annexure-C to the writ petition, which are some of the revenue receipts pertaining to payment of penalty on account of occupation of Government lands (Touzi Bahira) and there appears to be no correlation specifically in the pleadings with those documents. Annexure-D are some of the eviction notices dated 15.11.2021 which the petitioners have challenged pertaining to the initiation of the eviction proceeding initiated under Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886 (for short ‘the Regulations’).

4. In addition to that, this Court has also perused the affidavit-in-reply so filed by the petitioners through one Bimal Sarkar on 15.03.2024. It is interesting to take note of that the deponent of the said affidavit-in-reply is 44 years old as on 15.03.2024 and statements have been made in the affidavit-in-reply to the effect that some of the petitioners or their ancestors have migrated and have been residing in No.3 Chitalmari village between the period 1970-80. To the said affidavit-in-reply, it is further seen that the petitioners have enclosed application filed seeking allotment/settlement under the Basundhara 2.0 Government Scheme and those applications along with the acknowledgment has been enclosed as Annexure-E series. From a perusal of those applications, it transpires that all these application was filed sometime in March, 2023 much after the writ petition filed or for that matter eviction proceedings were initiated. This Court further finds it relevant to observe that the pleadings are silent as to which petitioners had submitted the application for settlement. Be that as it may, the case of the petitioners herein as would transpire from the pleadings is that the respondent authorities cannot evict the petitioners without following the due process, meaning thereby, without adhering to the principles of natural justice.

5. Ms. BS Goyal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that though there has been certain laxity in the pleadings on account of filing the writ petition on urgent basis, but the fact remains that all these petitioners or their predecessors-in-interest have been in possession of the lands since 1970-80 by resi