Shorif Uddin And 31 Ors. vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors.

Page No.# 1/10
GAHC010202012026

2026:GAU-AS:14161
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5174/2026
SHORIF UDDIN AND 31 ORS.
S/O- LATE. ABDUL KHALEK
2: NARUL ALI
S/O- LATE CHIRAJ ALI
3: ABDUL SALAM ALIAS ABDUL CHALAM
S/O- LATE AKKACH ALI
4: NOOR MAHAMMAD
S/O- SAMSER ALI
5: RAFIJUL HAQUE ALIAS RAFIQUL ISLAM
S/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD
6: JAMAL UDDIN
S/O- LATE MAHAR UDDIN
7: RAHMAN ALI ALIAS RAMJAN ALI
S/O- LATE MAHAR UDDIN
8: JALAL UDDIN
S/O- LATE AMSAR ALI
9: HANUFA KHATUN ALIAS HANUFA BEGUM
W/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD
10: SULTAN ALI
S/O- LATE ABUL KASHEM
11: ISMAIL ALI
S/O- LATE CHAFIULLAH
12: SORIFUL ISLAM ALIAS SIRAUL ISLAM

Page No.# 2/10
S/O- LATE HANIF ALI
13: CHAIDUL ISLAM
S/O- LATE NUR MAHAMMAD
14: SAIDUL ISLAM ALIAS SAIDUL ALI
S/O- LT. ABDUL KADIR
15: MOIDUL ISLAM
S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI
16: NIJAMUDDIN
S/O- LATE CHAYAB ALI
17: AHID ALI
S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI
18: KURJAT ALI
S/O- LATE SHAHED ALI
19: MUKTAR HUSSAIN
S/O- SAYED ALI
20: MANJUR RAHMAN
S/O-LT. JALILUR RAHMAN
21: SIRAJUL ISLAM
S/O- NEWAJ ALI
22: MUJAMMIL HOQUE
S/O- MOHAMMAD ALI
23: MAMUD ALI
S/O-LATE. ISMAIL ALI
24: SOHAR ALI
S/O-LATE. FAIJUDDIN ALI
25: CHAMED ALI
S/O - HAMED ALI
26: UMAR ALI
S/O. LATE ABDUL MANNAN
27: MAFIYA BEGUM
W/O. LATE. ABDUL KALAM
28: RAFUL ALI ALIAS RAFUL AMIN

Page No.# 3/10
S/O- MAMUD ALI
29: AJIJUL ISLAM ALIAS AIJUL ISLAM
S/O- MAMUD ALI
30: RAFIQUL ISLAM
S/O- MAMUD ALI
31: SAHED ALI ALIAS SHAID ALI
S/O- HAMED ALI
32: MOINUL ISLAM
S/O- MAMUD ALI
PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 27 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE 9/6 KOILAMARI
AND PETITIONERS NO. 28 TO 32 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- BORBIL
GAON
ALL ARE UNDER P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST. LAKHIMPUR
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, DISPUR-GHY-06.
2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ETC ASSAM
RUPNAGAR
GUWAHATI-32.
3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
LAKHIMPUR
NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST. LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM. PIN-787001.
4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
NORTH LAKHIMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE
NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST. LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM PIN-787001
Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. A HUSSAIN, MR. K ALOM,MR. T ISLAM
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE

Page No.# 4/10

BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
JUDGMENT
23.09.2026

Heard Mr. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. R. Borpujari, learned
Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam for
the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. N. Das, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for
the respondent nos. 3 & 4.

2. The petitioners, 32 in nos., have joined together to institute the present writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution stating that they have a common cause of action. As
regards the common cause of action, the petitioners have stated that they have been residing
in various parcel of Government land at 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village and Borbil Revenue
village, as mentioned in the Table given in paragraph 4 of the writ petition, since long. The
petitioners have approached this Court by the instant writ petition on being aggrieved by
issuance of similar notices to them on 06.08.2026 by the respondent no. 4. Some of those
notices are annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3 series.

3. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has referred to the contents
of the notices in Assamese dated 06.08.2026 to advance his submissions.

4. For ready reference, the contents of a notice dated 06.08.2026 are extracted
hereinbelow :-

GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM

Office of the Circle Officer : North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle: Lakhimpur

No: NL.L.C/Eviction - 2026/1346 Date: 06/08/2026

Page No.# 5/10

xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx

NOTICE REGARDING EVICTION UNDER SETTLEMENT RULE 18(2) OF THE ASSAM
LAND AND REVENUE REGULATION, 1886.

NOTICE

It is hereby informed to you that it has come to the notice of the undersigned that you have
unlawfully occupied general Government land in 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village under
North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle.

In view of this, in accordance with Government Notice No. 18[2] under the Assam Land
and Revenue Regulation, 1886, observing the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, Appeal no. 1132/2011, @ S.L.P. [C] no. 3109/2011
[Jagpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others], Md. Salak Uddin vs. the State of
Assam and two others on June 27, 2024, and Supreme Court Writ Petition [Civil] no.
295/2022, and as per the Revenue and Disaster Management Department Office
Memorandum no. RLR-162/2008/25 dated 06.02.2010 and H.H. 188/2011/Pt./29 dated 15
June 2015, under the powers conferred upon the undersigned under Rule 18[2] and 18[3]
of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, you are directed to submit any
documents supporting your claim, details, and circumstances regarding any house, shop,
building, or other construction erected by you on the said land to the Office of the Circle
Officer, North Lakhimpur, within 15 [fifteen] days. A hearing regarding this matter will be
conducted on 24.08.2026 at 11-00 a.m. If during the hearing you are proven to be an
encroacher, you must remove or clear any house, shop, building, or any type of crop
constructed or grown by you from the land at your own expense within 15 [fifteen] days,
and vacate the land. Otherwise, eviction action will be carried out by the administration as
per the rules. Furthermore, if you fail to appear at the office of the undersigned on the date

Page No.# 6/10
fixed for the hearing, the matter will be disposed of ex-parte based on the available
records, and eviction orders will be issued against you without any further communication.

Consider this matter urgent.

Schedule of Land :
Revenue Village: 9/6 Koilamari
Mouza : Nakari / Borbil
Dag No.: xxx

5. From the notices, it transpires that the noticees were asked to appear in the office of
the respondent no. 4 on 24.08.2026 to submit all documents in support of their respective
claims qua their occupation under different Dag numbers of Government land in 9/6 Koilamari
Revenue Village or Borbil Revenue Village, Mouza – Nakari, North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle.
The notices have made reference to Rule 18[2] and Rule 18[3] of the Settlement Rules,
framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886; the decisions of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no. 1132/2011 arising out of SLP[C] no. 3109/2011 [Jagpal
Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, (2011) 11 SCC 396]; Civil Appeal no.
295/2022 [Abdul Khaleque and others vs. State of Assam and others]; and the Judgment and
Order dated 27.06.2024 in W.P.[C] no. 1057/2022 [Md. Salak Uddin vs. the State of Assam
and others], [2024] 4 GLT 857. The respondent no. 4 has asked the noticees to explain the
circumstances under which the noticees have constructed houses, shops, buildings or other
constructions in Government land under various Dag numbers falling under 9/6 Koilamari
Revenue Village or Borbil Revenue Village, Mouza – Nakari, North Lakhimpur Revenue Circle
within fifteen days from the date of issuance of the notice also on 24.08.2026.

6. In the notice, it is further mentioned that during the course of enquiry, if any of the
noticees are found out to be an illegal encroacher, such noticee would be required to vacate
from the area of land in respect of which he is found out to be an illegal encroacher and also,
to remove all types of crops or structures at his own expense within a period of fifteen days

Page No.# 7/10
from the date of hearing. Else, eviction process would be carried out as per law and the costs
incurred for the eviction would be recovered from such noticee. It has been informed that in
the event a noticee would fail to appear at the office of the respondent no. 4 on the date
scheduled for hearing, the matter would be decided ex-parte on the basis of existing records
and there would be no further communication before an Order of eviction.

7. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the
notice is silent about individual consideration of the claim of each of the noticees as regards
his or her possession over the parcels of Government land under different Dag numbers
within 9/6 Koilamari Revenue Village and Borbil Revenue Village, North Lakhimpur Revenue
Circle . He has submitted that the petitioners are in long, continuous and uninterrupted
possession of different areas of land, small in sizes. The petitioners were earlier having lands
and they had been rendered homeless and landless due to various reasons.

8. Mr. Bhattacharya and Mr. Das have responded by submitting that the notices are as per
the provisions of the Settlement Rules, framed under the Assam Land and Revenue
Regulations, 1886 and in deference of the procedure indicated in the decisions referred to in
the notices. It is submitted by them that the parcels of land under unauthorized occupation of
the petitioners are Government land and, therefore, the procedure laid down in Rule 18[2] is
applicable. They have submitted, in view of the allegation made by the petitioners in para 9
of the writ petition that the receipt of the representations of the petitioners were not
acknowledged, the petitioners may, along with a copy of this writ petition, also produce the
copies of the representations, stated to have been submitted already before the respondent
no. 4, once again.

9. Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules has provided for ejection. Sub-rule [2] of Rule 18 has
provided that when such a person entered into possession of Government khas land, or
Waste land or estate over which no person has acquired the rights of a proprietor, land-holder
or settlement-holder or any land that has previously been reserved roads or roadside land or
for the grazing of village cattle or for other public purposes, or has entered into possession of
land from which he has been excluded by general or special orders and when further, there is

Page No.# 8/10
no bonafide claim of right involved he may be ejected or ordered to vacate the land forthwith,
and the Deputy Commissioner may sell, confiscate or destroy any crop raised, or any building
or other construction erected without authority on the land. Sub-rule [3][a] of the Rule 18
has provided for ejectment in all other cases which do not fall under Rule 18[2]. Rule 18[3]
[a] has prescribed for publication of a notice requiring the occupant to vacate the land
specified in a notice, within fifteen days from the date of publication of the notice in the
manner prescribed and to remove any buildings, houses, fences or crops, etc. which may
have been raised on such land, provided that the Deputy Commissioner may give time to any
particular occupant to harvest the crops, if any, growing on such land.

10. The law regarding common village land/community land like VGR, PGR has been well
settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh [supra] and the same
is not required to be adverted to. On consideration of the provisions of Rule 18, a Division
Bench of this Court in Salak Uddin [supra] has drawn a conclusion that the revenue
authorities cannot be permitted to unilaterally decide as to whether an occupier/possessor
has a bonafide claim of right involved in as much as it would require adjudication of both law
and facts and if an opportunity to the occupier/possessor is not provided, the same would be
in violation of the principles of natural justice which, in turn, would violate Article 14, Article
19 and Article 21 of the Constitution. It has been observed that prior notice to the
occupier/possessor before initiation of proceeding under Rule 18[2] of the Settlement Rules is
the mandate of law in order to save Rule 18[2] of the Settlement Rules from being
constitutionally invalid on procedural grounds.

11. This Court having regard to the provisions of the Settlement Rules and the
observations made in Salak Uddin [supra] finds no infirmity in issuance of the notices dated
06.08.2026, the it conforms on the aspects regarding serving prior notices and grant of
opportunity to file representation and to afford personal hearing.

12. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that in response to
the notices, the petitioners/noticees have already responded by submitting their individual
replies along with all the supporting documents in respect of their claim, more particularly,

Page No.# 9/10
about the long and continuous occupation of the petitioners or predecessors-in-interest of the
petitioners to reside in the areas in question.

13. It is relevant to refer to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Abdul Khaleque
and others vs. State of Assam and others , 2026 INSC 140 , which arose out of notices
issued by an authority in the State Government to the appellants therein on the premise that
the appellants were allegedly residing inside reserved forest areas. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court did not find any infirmity in the process sought to be adopted by the State respondents
for removal of encroachment, as the process is found to have conformed to the principles of
fairness, reasonable and due process. The process to be adopted in the case in hand is
similar to the process adopted therein for removal of encroachment.

14. On the process sought to be adopted by the State respondents for removal of
encroachment from reserved forest areas, placed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the
State Government had undertaken that if an unauthorised occupation is found under the
reserved area after scrutiny of the documents, a speaking order would be passed and shall be
served on the concerned person, giving him fifteen days’ notice to vacate the unauthorised
occupation and only after expiry of the period of notice, the action shall be taken to remove
the unauthorised occupants.

15. Taking note of the above observations of the Division Bench in Salak Uddin [supra]
and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Abdul Khaleque [supra], this Court is of the considered
view that when a noticee is served with a notice alleging unauthorised occupation on his part
of any plot of land, which falls in the categories mentioned in Rule 18[2] of the Settlement
Rules, the noticee is to be given due opportunity of placing his or her case before the
authority by way of a representation, if he chooses to do so, and thereafter, the authority is
obligated to give due consideration to such representation submitted in response to the
notice qua the claim made by the noticee, and to all the documents, if any, submitted along
with the representation in support of his or her claim, regarding his or her occupation and
right to be settled on the concerned plot of land, and thereafter, to pass a speaking order as
regards the status of the noticee qua the plot of land, stated to be under his or her

Page No.# 10/10
occupation.

16. As Mr. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the
petitioners have already submitted their representations in response to the notices and a
hearing has already been taken place, the responsibility is now cast upon the authority to
dispose of each of the representations so submitted by passing a speaking order individually.
It is accordingly ordered. The speaking order so passed is to be communicated to each of the
petitioners immediately thereafter. It is only after determining the status of each of the
noticees in the afore-mentioned manner, further action contemplated is to be taken by
following due procedure.

17. To facilitate the process of consideration of the representations and passing speaking
orders, the petitioners shall submit a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ
petition with annexures and the copies of the representation, stated to have been submitted
by the petitioners with an allegation that receipt of the copies of the representation were not
acknowledged, before the respondent no. 4 within a period of seven days from today.

18. With the observations made and the directions given above, the writ petition is
disposed of. There is no order as to cost.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant