##PAGE1##

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010284752025

2025:GAU-AS:17695

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/7438/2025

ABDUL HAI

S/O ISMAIL, VILL. - LONGJUMP 700 ACRE PADUMONI, MAUZA - GORUBAT,

P.O. - BARPANI, P.S. KOCHUA, DIST. - NAGAON ASSAM, PIN - 782426

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS

, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE

ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-6.

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM

REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-6.

4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

ASSAM

PANJABARI

GUWAHATI-37.

5:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

ASSAM

PANJABARI

GUWAHATI-37.

Page No.# 2/5

6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER

NAGAON DIVISION

NAGAON

PIN -782001.

7:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

NAGAON DISTRICT

NAGAON

PIN -782001.

8:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

KAMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE

NAGAON

PIN - 782426.

9:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE

KACHUA POLICE STATION

NAGAON

PIN 78242

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S B CHOUDHURY,

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FOREST

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

ORDER

Date : 19.12.2025

Heard Ms. S. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Challenge made in this writ petition is to the notice dated 21.11.2025,

issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon Forest Division, whereby the

Page No.# 3/5

petitioner has been directed to vacate the land located within the Lutumai

Reserve Forest in the district of Nagaon within 15 (fifteen) days.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that on receipt of the eviction notice

dated 21.11.2025, he has submitted the required documents in support of his

possession of the land. The land under the possession of the petitioner falls

under the revenue village which is outside the boundary of Lutumai Reserve

Forest. The authorities have not considered the same instead issued the

impugned notice of eviction.

4. Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that despite

submission of documents as directed, no consideration has been made as on

today and the petitioner would be evicted without adjudication of his claim. She

submits that the land under the possession of the petitioner does not fall within

the Lutumai Reserve Forest.

5. Mr. P. N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, referring to the

judgment rendered in the case of Abdul Khalek in WA No. 251/2025

submits that this Court has mandated that the encroachers of the reserve forest

shall be evicted. While doing so, if it is found that there are some settlers, even

though unauthorized, they ought to be given a reasonable period of 15 (fifteen)

days time and thereafter a further period of 15 (fifteen) days for exiting

encroached land. He submits that the petitioner has failed to bring on record

any material to substantiate the claim that any representation or supporting

documents were submitted before the authority, except the bald submission

made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Page No.# 4/5

6. Upon consideration of the matter, it would reveal that except for the copy

of the impugned notice of eviction dated 21.11.2025, issued by the Divisional

Forest Officer, Nagaon Forest Division, no any other document is placed on

record in support of the claim of the petitioner that the land in his possession

falls outside the boundary of the Lutumai Reserve Forest. Thus, in absence of

such material, it would be difficult for this Court to determine as to whether the

petitioner has any right to claim over the land in question. However, since this

Court in WA No. 251/2025 has permitted even the unauthorized occupants

within the reserve forest land to provide an opportunity, this Court deems it

appropriate, in the interest of justice, to permit the petitioner to approach the

competent authority by filing a representation along with supporting documents

for appropriate consideration.

7. Accordingly, this writ pe