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

2026 Supreme(Gau) 393

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Belguri Natun Bazar Panjagana Masjid and Another – Appellants
Versus
The State of Assam and Others – Respondents
WP (C) No. 213 of 2026
Decided On : 13-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.R. Bhuyan
For the Respondents: M. Barman, R. Borpujari

Parties have the right to claim allotment over government waste lands, and eviction requires clear statutory acknowledgment of grazing reserve status.

Headnote:(A) Assam Land Policy, 2019 - Sections relating to Village Grazing Reserve - Eviction proceedings - Petitioners claim rights over land based on community needs and representation for allotment - Interim orders stayed eviction pending resolution of representation - Court emphasized on statutory requirements for declaring land as Village Grazing Reserve and rights to seek allotment of government waste land. (Paras 10, 13, 16, 20, 22)

(B) Right to representation - Court upheld the petitioners' right to submit documents evidencing that the land claimed is not a grazing reserve - Directions issued for the District Commissioner regarding handling of representations and maintaining status quo. (Paras 22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners established a mosque on land they claim is not Village Grazing Reserve (VGR) but received eviction notice citing it as VGR. They sought allotment of the land, maintaining community usage, and contested the eviction based on absence of formal VGR notification.

Findings of Court:
Petitioners allowed to submit representation regarding their claim, with instructions that no evictions occur pending decision on such claims.

Issues: Whether the land occupied is truly designated as a VGR, and the legal implications of eviction without due process and documentation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court stated that eviction proceedings were contingent upon proper statutory declarations designating the land as VGR, and emphasized the necessity for consideration of community use and rights to seek allotment.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions for future proceedings and maintenance of status quo.

Table of Content
1. eviction based on land classification (Para 2 , 5 , 6)
2. establishment of mosque on disputed land (Para 3 , 4 , 12)
3. criteria for the definition of vgr land (Para 8 , 19)
4. court's analysis on eviction rights and representation (Para 10 , 11 , 17 , 21)
5. assam land policy restrictions on land allotment (Para 13 , 14)
6. supreme court directives on illegal occupation (Para 15 , 16)
7. directions for representation and hearing procedures (Para 22)

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Ms. M. Barman, the learned Junior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners against an action initiated by the District Administration for evicting the Petitioners on the ground that the land in question under the occupation of the Petitioners are Village Grazing Reserve lands.

3. The facts of the instant case as it emerges from the perusal of the writ petition is that the Petitioners had established a permanent Mosque in a plot of land admeasuring 1 Bigha 2 Kathas under Dag No.3 of Village Belguri under Khatowal Mouza in the District of Nagaon. It is an admitted fact as stated in Paragraph No.7 of the instant writ petition that the land in question is situated under Khatowal Mouza in village Belguri and falls under Kisamat No.3, Grazing Dag.

4. Be it as it may, the Petitioners upon setting up the permanent Mosque on the said land, have been requesting the Government for allotment of the said land as the said mosque caters to the needs of the local community residing in and around the said Masjid. Various representations in that regard have been filed from time to time.

5. It is the case of the Petitioners that on 03.12.2025, a notice was issued by the Circle Officer, Samaguri Revenue Circle informing the Petitioner No.1 that the land under their possession is a part of the Village Grazing Reserve and they would be evicted within 15 days from the date of the said notice. The Petitioners were also asked to submit valid documents relating to the said land within 7 days before the Circle Officer, Samaguri Revenue Circle and the date of the hearing was fixed on 12.12.2025 at 11:00 AM.

6. It is the further case of the Petitioners that the Petitioners thereupon submitted a representation to the District Commissioner, Nagaon to stop the eviction of the Masjid inasmuch as, the market set up in the said land was done with the permission of the concerned Gaon Panchayats and there has been also an application filed for allotment of the said land. The said representation being not considered, the Petitioners have therefore approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

7. This Court vide an order dated 09.01.2026 passed an interim order directing that there shall be no eviction in terms with the notice dated 03.12.2025. The record reveals that the interim order thereupon have been extended from time to time.

8. In the meanwhile, an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the Respondent No.2 stating inter alia that the land where the Petitioner No.1 Masjid has been constructed is a VGR land, and as such, formal notices were issued to those who have encroached the VGR land at Beloguri, Kachari Gaon. It is also mentioned that on the date fixed for hearing i.e. on 12.12.2025, the Petitioners failed to produce any valid document/records during the time of hearing. Further to that, it is also mentioned that the Petitioners does not have any documentary evidence that they are landless. The said affidavit-in-opposition was filed on 06.02.2026 and a rejoinder affidavit was filed on 09.03.2026. The Petitioners in their rejoinder affidavit have denied the land to be a VGR land and further mentioned the procedure to be followed for notifying a grazing reserve.

9. It is therefor

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