The court ruled that eviction notices must adhere to principles of natural justice, requiring prior notice and an opportunity for affected parties to present their case.

JUDGMENT :

Devashis Baruah, J.

Heard Mr. R. Alom, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Ms. P. R. Mahanta, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Mr. N. Goswami, the learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.2 & 3.

2. Thirteen (13) writ petitioners have joined together to file the instant writ petition complaining about various notices issued by the Respondent No.3 which have been collectively enclosed to the writ petition as Anenxure-14.

3. The Petitioners herein claim that they are in possession of various small plots of land at village Paschim Boragaon in the District of Kamrup (M).

4. The possession of the Petitioners over these lands is through land sale agreement entered into with original pattadars and have been under control and care of the Petitioners for several years. It is therefore the case of the Petitioners that it is not a case that the Petitioners are encroachers but they are in settled possession upon permissions being granted by the original pattadars. Be that as it may, it is also an admitted fact as would be seen from the Paragraph No.5 of the writ petition that the Petitioners have applied for settlement of land under seeking the regularization of the long-standing possession over the lands situated at Paschim Boragaon.

5. Mr. R. Alom, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that no decision have been taken in respect to all these applications by the Respondent Authorities. It is however pertinent to observe that filing of application seeking settlement prima facie appears that the Petitioners have admitted that these are Government lands. The learned counsel for the Petitioners further submitted that the Petitioners also have raised constructions over these lands and have been issued Holding Numbers by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and the said documents have also been enclosed to the present writ petition.

6. The grievance of the Petitioners however is that while their applications seeking settlement are pending, the Respondent Authorities have issued notices under Section 18(3) of the Settlement Rules to the Petitioners on various dates. These notices as already stated above have been collectively enclosed as Annexure-14 to the writ petition.

7. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Respondent No.3 by way of these notices have directed the Petitioners to vacate the lands within 15 days without carrying out any adjudication as regards the rights of the Petitioners qua the lands under their possession. The learned counsel further submitted that on one hand, the Petitioners have been asked to vacate within 15 days and on the other hand, the Petitioners have been also asked to appear for hearing on the 14th day of the notice which means that even if any representation is submitted, it would not be a meaningful exercise. He therefore submitted that this is a fit case where the impugned notices are required to set aside and quashed.

8. Per contra, Ms. P. R. Mahanta, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue Department submitted that the lands in question being Government lands, no person has rights to remain in occupation of such land unless allotted and settled as per the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 read with the Settlement Rules. She further submitted that instead of setting aside these notices, the notices be construed as Show Cause Notices upon the Petitioners and a period of 15 days can be granted to the Petitioners from today for submitting their respective