SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 500

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Vijay Bishnoi, CJ., N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.
Amri Karbi Development Society And Ors. - Appellant 
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Ors. - Respondent 
PIL/80/2020
Decided On : 30-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR. M SARANIA, MS. I KEITZAR,MR H MEDHI,MR. A I KATHAR
For the Respondent: GA, ASSAM, MS. N BORDOLOI, SC, REVENUE DEPTT. ASSAM,ASSTT.S.G.I.,SC, G M D A

Public Interest Litigations must be filed bona fide and not for personal gain; courts must ensure genuine public interest is involved.

Headnote:(A) Assam State Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2017 - Sections 33 and 17 - Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 40 - Public Interest Litigation (PIL) - Petitioners challenged the extension of jurisdiction of GMDA and GMC to tribal belts, claiming it violates protections under Chapter X of ALRR, 1886 - Court found no legal infirmity or bona fide in petitioners' claims, deeming the PIL frivolous and an abuse of process. (Paras 2, 17, 32)

(B) Public Interest Litigation - The court emphasized that PILs must be filed bona fide and not for personal gain or publicity, reiterating the need for genuine public interest. (Paras 6, 88)

(C) Costs - The court imposed a cost of Rs. 20,000 on petitioners for filing a frivolous PIL. (Paras 33, 34)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, a registered society, claimed to represent the Amri Karbi community and challenged the Assam State Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2017, alleging it would harm tribal rights and lead to unjust land acquisition.

Findings of Court:
The court found the petitioners failed to substantiate their claims and did not demonstrate any genuine public harm or injury.

Issues: The main issues included the legitimacy of the petitioners' claims regarding the Act's impact on tribal rights and the bona fides of the PIL.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioners did not provide sufficient evidence to support their claims and emphasized the importance of bona fide intentions in filing PILs.

Result: The PIL petition was dismissed, and costs were imposed on the petitioners.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.

Heard Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 4; Mr. P. Nayak, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2 & 3; Mr. N. Das, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 5 & 6; and Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, learned Dy. SGI, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 7 & 8.

2. The petitioners, herein, i.e. Amri Karbi Development Society, and its Office Bearers, have instituted the present PIL petition, praying for the following reliefs:

I. Certiorari shall not be issued directing the respondent authorities to set aside and quash the extension of the jurisdiction of the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority and the Guwahati Municipal Corporation, to the tribal belts and blocks of Kamrup (M) and its surrounding districts, by enacting the Assam State Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2017 impugned notification issued vide No.LGL.234/2017/5 dated 25.10.2017, as illegal, null and void for being in contravention of the object and provisions of Chapter X of the ALRR, 1886;

II. Certiorari not be issued an authorities to set aside and quash the acquisition of 144 Bighas 19 Lechas of land in Damara Pathar Village Panbari Mouza, Sonapur Circle, Sub-Division Guwahati Kamrup (Metro) district by the Government of Assam vide impugned Gazette Notification No. 278 dated 29.05.2018, pertaining to L.A. Case No. 9/2011 vide impugned notification No. RLA.215/2014/89, as arbitrary and unjustified for invoking the 'urgency clause' under Section 40 of the Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, without any real emergency, in defiance of the object, intent and spirit of the Act;

III. Mandamus shall not be issued directing the respondent authorities to implementation of the protective provisions of Chapter X of the Assam Land Revenue and Regulation, 1886 pertaining to the notified Tribal Belts and Blocks within the state of Assam;

IV. Mandamus shall not be issued directing the respondent authorities to conduct a survey and mapping for correcting the land records and for returning the tribal lands to the original owners; and/or after return of the Rule and hearing of the parties, being further pleased to make the Rule Absolute giving full and complete relief to the Petitioners and/or pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. The facts requisite for adjudication of the issue as arising in the present PIL petition, is noticed as under:

The petitioner No. 1 viz. Amri Karbi Development Society, by projecting itself to be a registered Society working to protect and uplift the Amri Karbi Community residing in the State of Assam, excluding the scheduled Districts of the State, have instituted the present PIL petition, purportedly, ventilating the cause of the common people as they cannot approach the Court in their individual capacity due to financial incapacity. It is also contended in the PIL petition that the petitioners No. 2 & 3 are also the President and Secretary, respectively, of Amri Karbi National Council, which organization is projected to be involved in ventilating the grievances of the common people.

The petitioners in the present PIL petition, have, inter alia, raised grievances with regard to the formation of the “Assam State Capital Region” vide enactment of the “Assam State Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2017”. Such grievance of the petitioners is premised on the ground that the tribal belts and blocks existing in the Kamrup(Metro) District, on being included within the “Assam State Capital Region”; the protected classes of persons residing in such belts and blocks, would be denied the protections extended to them under the provisions of Chapt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top