The court held that disputes arising from lease contracts fall under civil jurisdiction, and the state resumption of property is lawful under lease provisions.

1. This case was placed before me for hearing on difference between Deka and Mehrotra, JJ.

2. The question raised in this case is whether a resumption of a leasehold by the State of Assam purporting to act under the provisions of the lease itself is remediable under the provisions of Art. 226 of the Constitution.

3. The facts have been dealt with elaborately in the judgment of Mr. Justice Mehrotra and I desire to state only a few of them just to make the judgment understandable. The Secretary of State for India - in - Council settled with one Captain E. N. Manley, 4.777 acres of land for ninety nine years on a premium of Rs. 716-8-9 on an annual revenue of Rs. 35-13-3 by document dated the 1st of April, 1907 and this document was signed by the Deputy Commissioner, United Khasi and Jaintia Hills, Shillong, on behalf of the lessor, the Secretary of State for India - in - Council.
On the 18th March, 1909, the land which is the subject - matter of the lease was purchased by Messrs. Jummatollah and Sons and the name of the purchaser was mutated in the land records. The petitioner, Mahammad Hanif is alleged to be the owner of the land by inheritance, and he resides in one of the houses within the holding. Two other houses, within the same holding contiguous to one another after the residential house of the petitioner are situated there within the holding. One of these houses is known as "Cryptomaria" and the other as "Cedar Lodge."
This house in question "Cryptomaria", which will hereafter be referred to as the house, was leased to the Government of Assam in May, 1957 at a rental of Rs. 450/- per month in which one of the Ministers of the State of Assam resided. According to the petitioner, the Minister was still in occupation, when this application was made. On the 20th March, 1959, the Deputy Commissioner, United Khasi and Jaintia Hills, requisitioned this house by an order for accommodation of the said Minister.
Against that order of requisition, an appeal was preferred and on the 19th August, 1959, the Government set aside that order of requisition and on the following 18th September, the Deputy Commissioner served another notice on the petitioner stating that he would take possession of the house, as ordered by the Government, with the land and building thereon and it is this order of the Government, which is challenged by this petition. The order of resumption was communicated to the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner on the 18th September last in the following terms :
"I am to forward herewith a copy of order of the Government of Assam for resumption of the 'Cryptomaria' property for public purpose and to state that as ordered therein, possession of the land along with buildings and improvements made thereon, if any, will be taken over by me on the expiry of the period of 7 (seven) days from the date of receipt of this notice.''
The order of the Government dated the 8th September, 1959, states that the Governor was satisfied that it was necessary to resume the plot of land under the provisions of clause V of the deed of lease for a public purpose, namely, for providing suitable accommodation to Ministers, Government servants and Government offices; and it was further stated in the Government order that "providing suitable accommodation to Ministers. Government servants and Government offices" constituted a public purpose and by the said order, the Deputy Commissioner was directed to forthwith take necessary steps to re - enter upon the said land on giving seven days notice in writing and take possession thereof along with all buildings and improvements made thereon by the lessee, if any, and thereafter pay the lessee compensation as may be due in resumption proceedings. To appreciate the point involved, c