IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Manish Choudhury, J.
Habibar Rahman, S/o- Late Ayub Ali - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam Rep. By The Commissioner and Secretary to The Govt. of Assam, Revenue and Disaster Management Department And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/6813/2024
Decided On : 24-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. J. Handique, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam; and Mr. P. Kakoti, learned counsel for the all the respondents.
2. In this writ petition instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has projected that he is a joint pattadar and owner of a plot of land, measuring 1 Katha, covered by Dag no. 705 & K.P. Patta no. 26, situate at Village – Dangarkuchi Gaon, Mouza – Ghilazari, Barpeta Revenue Circle, District - Barpeta [‘the subject-plot’, for short]. The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner’s son is presently pursuing his course of Master of Business Administrative [MBA] at NERIM Group of Institutions at Guwahati. In order to pay admission fees and other education expenses for the MBA course, there has arisen an urgent requirement of a substantial amount of money. The petitioner has, therefore, offered to sell the subject-plot to an intended purchaser.
2.1. The petitioner has stated that after executing an agreement for sale of the subject-plot with an intended purchaser, the petitioner submitted an application for granting a No Objection Certificate [NOC] for Sale/Transfer of Land before the jurisdictional Development Authority. The petitioner has been issued a No Objection Certificate [NOC] for Sale/Transfer of the subject-plot of land by the Barpeta Development Authority, constituted under the Assam Town and Country Planning Act, 1959, on 08.08.2024. The petitioner has stated that as he was also required to get a Sale Permission / No Objection Certificate [NOC] to sell the subject-plot from the jurisdictional District Commissioner, he had also applied for Sale Permission/NOC before the respondent no. 3 on 29.05.2024 by following all the requisite formalities. After processing the application, the respondent no. 3 on 25.06.2024, issued a No Objection Certificate [NOC] for transfer of the subject-plot by way of sell, etc. to the petitioner in respect of the subject-plot.
2.2. After getting permissions from the Barpeta Development Authority and the respondent no. 3, the petitioner applied online for registration of the Sale Deed along with the afore- mentioned Sale Permissions/NOCs before the respondent no. 3, who is also the jurisdictional District Registrar. The respondent no. 3 on 03.10.2024, acknowledged the receipt of the application for Deed Registration vide Acknowledgment no. 20240002996089. While issuing acknowledgement, it was further mentioned that the petitioner could prefer an appeal if the service was not delivered within one day. The office of the District Registrar, Barpeta had also generated a Pre-Registration Summary incorporating the details for effecting registration of the Sale Deed. As the service of Deed Registration has not been provided by the District Commissioner –cum- District Registrar, Barpeta [the respondent no. 3] despite elapse of a long period without assigning any reason, the petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition on 16.12.2024.
3. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has submitted all the supporting documents in support of his application for registration of Sale Deed. Despite submission of all the supporting documents, the respondent no. 3 and the respondent no. 4 have not yet disposed of the application of the petitioner. As an applicant/citizen, the petitioner at least has the right to know the reason as to why his application for registration of Sale Deed has not yet been disposed of and the petitioner has to approach the Court seeking a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent no. 3 and the respondent no. 4 to expedite the registration process of the Sale Deed.
4. Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appearing for the respondents has submitted that there are valid
Public authorities must provide timely services and reasons for delays or rejections under the Assam Right to Public Services Act, ensuring citizens' rights are upheld.
Public authorities are required to provide explicit reasons for rejection of applications to ensure transparency and allow rectification of deficiencies.
Public authorities must provide clear reasons for decision-making to uphold statutory compliance and transparency in administrative actions.
The lack of recorded reasons in rejection orders violates principles of natural justice and statutory obligations, rendering such decisions arbitrary and void.
Public authorities must provide clear reasons for decisions; non-speaking orders violate statutory requirements.
A non-speaking order in administrative decisions violates principles of natural justice and statutory obligations, necessitating a reasoned decision.
Administrative decisions must be reasoned to ensure fairness and compliance with statutory obligations, particularly under the Assam Right to Public Services Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.