Appellate authority must determine condonation of delay before deciding the statutory appeal on merits.

The 23 petitioners claimed that their predecessors’ lands in Mayerchar Part-I (Shialmari), under Lakhipur Revenue Circle and South Salmara Revenue Circle, were lost to river erosion during the 1970s–1990s, rendering their families landless. They presently reside at Charuabakhra Jungle Block under Chapar Revenue Circle, Dhubri

After earlier applications for settlement allegedly remained unattended, the petitioners applied under the Mission Basundhara 2.0 public service for settlement of one bigha of Khas/Ceiling Surplus land each. Their applications, submitted on 11 December 2022, were rejected on various dates between 14 August 2023 and 30 July 2025

The petitioners thereafter filed a first appeal under Section 8(1) of the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012 (“ARTPS Act”) before the Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, on 19 August 2026, albeit with delay

They approached the High Court seeking directions for registration and expeditious disposal of the appeal on merits.

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition when the petitioners had already invoked the statutory first-appellate remedy under Section 8(1) of the ARTPS Act

2. Whether the First Appellate Authority should consider the delay in filing the appeal under the proviso to Section 8(1) of the ARTPS Act and, if sufficient cause is shown, decide the appeal on merits

3. Whether the High Court should direct the First Appellate Authority to take the appeal on board and dispose of it in accordance with law

The Court applied Section 8(1) of the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012, which provides a statutory first appeal against the rejection or non-delivery of a notified public service, together with its proviso permitting the Appellate Authority to admit an appeal filed beyond limitation where sufficient cause for the delay is established

The Court also noted that “Settlement of Khas & Ceiling Surplus Land” had been notified as a public service under the ARTPS Act by Notification dated 11 November 2022, with settlement governed by the Assam Land Policy, 2019 and the applicable Settlement Rules

Rule 8 of the Settlement Rules recognises priority for persons rendered homeless or landless by flood or erosion, although the Court did not adjudicate the petitioners’ substantive entitlement

Since the petitioners had already filed a first appeal challenging rejection of their settlement applications, adjudication of the writ petition would create a parallel proceeding with the statutory appellate process

The Court therefore declined to examine the merits of the land-settlement claims or the validity of the rejection orders.

It held that the statutory First Appellate Authority was the proper forum to determine both whether the delay should be condoned and, if so, whether the appeals were meritorious.

In accordance with the proviso to Section 8(1), the Authority was required first to assess whether the petitioners had shown sufficient cause for the delay and thereafter to proceed with the appeals in accordance with law

The Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Assam, acting as the First Appellate Authority under Section 8(1) of the ARTPS Act, was directed to take the first appeal stated to have been filed by the petitioners on board and dispose of it on merits.

The Authority was specifically directed to consider the delay in filing the appeal and decide whether sufficient cause existed for condonation before proceeding with the merits