GAHC010249702024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/650/2024 MIR SUMESHUDDIN AHMED S/O LATE CHANDU SHEIKH, R/O NOTBOMA, P.O. AND P.S. HATIGAON, DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS BABUL BAISHYA, ACS THE CIRCLE OFFICER, DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE, BASISTHA, GUWAHATI-

28, ASSAM For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M. Hussain, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. R. Baruah, Government Advocate BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

ORDER

Date : 09.03.2026 Heard Mr. M. Hussain, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. S. R. Baruah, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

2. The Petitioner herein has approached this Court by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No.5700/2023 alleging that upon an application filed by the Petitioner, a demarcation proceedings have been registered as Demarcation Case No.80/2022, but the Respondent Authorities did not take any steps for carrying out the demarcation.

3. It is further relevant to take note of that this Court passed an order on 26.07.2024 directing the Respondent No.3 i.e. the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle to complete the Demarcation Case No.80/2022 within 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order furnished by the Petitioner. The Petitioner thereupon on 14.08.2024 submitted the certified copy of the order dated 26.07.2024 without any whisper in the said communication that the demarcation have already been carried out. Thereupon, the Petitioner had approached this Court by filing the instant contempt application.

4. An affidavit has been filed by the sole Respondent herein wherein it is mentioned that pursuant to the demarcation proceedings being initiated as Demarcation Case No.80/2022, various steps have been taken for issuance of notice upon all concerned. Thereupon, on 02.05.2023, the demarcation was carried out in presence of the Petitioner and in that regard, the documents containing the signatures of the Petitioner had also been enclosed.

5. It therefore appears that the Petitioner herein has taken this Court for a ride by not only pointing out before this Court that there was a demarcation carried out on 02.05.2023 prior to the order passed on 26.07.2024 but in the instant proceedings also, the Petitioner has suppressed the fact that on 02.05.2023, the demarcation was carried out.

6. The question therefore arises before this Court as to whether, the Petitioner at the time of filing WP(C) No.5700/2023 had mentioned that there was a demarcation proceedings carried out on 02.05.2023 in his presence. For that purpose, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the records of WP(C) 7. List this matter again on 30.03.2026 along with the records

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant