Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Goutam Dey, S/O- Lt. Gouranga Dey – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By The General Manager, North Frontier Railway, Maligaon – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Devashis Baruah, J.
Heard Mr. K. K. Mahanta, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. P. Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3; Ms. M. Barman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.4, 6 & 7 as well as Mr. J. Chutia, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.5.
2. 32 petitioners have joined together to file the instant writ petition challenging the eviction proceedings so initiated against them by the respondent Nos.6 & 7 at the behest of the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3.
3. The petitioners herein claim that since 1970 onwards, they have been in occupation of respective plots of land in Ward No.4, Bokajan thereby running their livelihood of their families through stationery, grocery, medicine, tea stall, hardware, photoshop, photo studio, shoe shop, etc. by constructing wooden shops with CI sheets having valid trade licenses from the Karbi Anglong Autonomous District Council as well as from the local authority, i.e. Bokajan Town Committee under the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council. In the year 2011-12, notices were issued
Eviction orders lacking reasons violate principles of natural justice; petitioners must be allowed to submit individual representations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of authority of the Estate Officer and the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established is that the nature of the right claimed and the absence of mention of agreement termination in eviction notices determine the applicability of the Public Premises (Ev....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute between the petitioners' claim as landholders and the claim of unauthorized occupation by the Estate Officer should be decided by ....
Unauthorized occupation of public premises does not confer legal rights; eviction proceedings must adhere to statutory requirements, and alleged violations of natural justice must be substantiated.
The court established that the procedural requirements for eviction under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, must be strictly followed, including the issuance of a no....
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
