Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
James Warren Tea Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam And Rep. By Its Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam, Deptt. Of Land Revenue (Reforms) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Devashis Baruah, J.
Heard Mr. Bhaskar Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. J Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and I have also heard Ms. G Hazarika, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Mr. SS Roy, the learned Government Advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of the State respondents.
2. The petitioner herein has assailed the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia i.e. the respondent No.2 whereby in exercise of Rule 116 of the Settlement Rules framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886 (for short, ‘the Regulation’) had struck off the name of the petitioner from the Register of Records in respect to land measuring 209 bighas 4 kathas 13 lechas covered by Dag Nos. 101/102/103/104/106/114/115/119/118 of Tea Period Patta No.1 of Pabhojan T.E. 206 No. Application under Hapjan Mouza of Doomdooma Revenue Circle of Tinsukia District (for the sake of convenience referred to as ‘the land in question’) and reverted the land back to the State Government.
3. The issue which has been raised in the instant proceedings is as to whether merely because of the fact that the petitione
The Deputy Commissioner cannot strike off a recorded proprietor's name for lack of possession without proof of loss of interest, maintaining property rights against unlawful encroachments.
The Deputy Commissioner cannot strike off a name from land records solely based on non-possession without considering the interest in the estate.
The settlement granted to the petitioner association could not be cancelled unless found to have been contrary to the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886.
No settlement of Government land for brick kilns without temporary permission from the Government, supported by applicable land policies and regulations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cancellation of a mutation must adhere to the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, and the authority reviewing the muta....
Settlement authorities cannot override confirmed property rights without lawful authority; Judicial review ensures adherence to due process in land ownership disputes.
An order made without jurisdiction is null and void, reinforcing the established property rights in land ownership disputes under the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958.
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
