Availability of statutory alternative remedy under Right to Public Services Act bars exercise of writ jurisdiction.

The petitioners, sons of Late Amatulla Sk, claim continuous occupation of land measuring 1 Bigha 2 Kathas 5 Lessas and 4 Kathas 7 Lessas in Village Adabari Part-II, Dhubri.

The land was originally allotted to their father on 12.04.1976.

On 24.10.2024, the petitioners applied for the "Conversion of Allotment Certificate [AC] to Periodic Patta [PP]" via the Sewa Setu portal under the Assam Right to Public Services Act.

Despite the statutory 90-day processing timeline, the application remained pending.

Fearing eviction and seeking the conversion, the petitioners approached the High Court via a writ petition.

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to immediate writ jurisdiction for the non-disposal of their land conversion application when an alternative statutory remedy exists under the Assam Right to Public Services Act.

2. Whether the court should grant interim protection against eviction while the statutory appeal is pending.

Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012, specifically Section 4, which defines notified public services and timelines, and Section 8, which provides a two-tier appellate remedy for grievances related to service delays or decisions.

Revenue & Disaster Management Department Notification dated 09.07.2024, which officially categorized "Conversion of AC to PP" as a notified service with a mandatory 90-day disposal period.

The principle that writ jurisdiction is generally not entertained when an "alternative, adequate, and statutory remedy" is available.

The court found that the State Government had explicitly notified the conversion of land certificates as a public service under the 2012 Act, establishing a clear administrative workflow (LRA-LRS-CO-ADC-DC) and a 90-day deadline.

Since the petitioners' application was acknowledged but not settled within the timeline, Section 8 of the Act provides a specific legal remedy: a First Appeal to the Director of Land Records & Surveys (DLR&S), Assam, followed by a Second Appeal to the RTPS Commission.

The court reasoned that since this statutory mechanism is designed to handle such delays, the petitioners must exhaust this route before seeking extraordinary relief under Article 226.

The court further determined that any immediate concerns regarding eviction should be addressed by the First Appellate Authority through a prayer for interim relief.

The court directed that if the petitioners file an appeal before the 1st Appellate Authority (Director of Land Records & Surveys, Assam) within 30 days, the authority must consider the appeal on its merits and pass a speaking order.

Regarding the apprehension of eviction, the Appellate Authority was directed to consider any application for interim relief as permissible by law.

The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.