Deputy Commissioners must decide land-transfer NOC applications within thirty days, issuing speaking orders for non-issuance.

The petitioner entered into an Agreement for Sale in June 2025 for purchase of a 646.18 sq. ft. residential flat in an apartment building at S.K. Bhuyan Road, Dighali-Pukhuri East, Guwahati, Kamrup Metropolitan District.

On 24 June 2025, he applied through the Sewa Setu portal for the notified service of “Composite Land Sale Transfer,” receiving Acknowledgment No. NOC/24/58535/2025.

The application was forwarded successively by the Land Records Assistant, Circle Officer, Additional District Commissioner and District Commissioner.

On 28 September 2025, the District Commissioner forwarded it to the Special Branch for recommendation.

No final decision was communicated thereafter. The petitioner consequently approached the High Court seeking directions for processing and finalisation of his application.

1. Whether the respondent authorities were required to decide the petitioner’s application for issuance of a No Objection Certificate and related composite land-transfer service within the statutory and notified time limits under Section 21A of the Registration Act, 1908 and the applicable government notifications.

2. Whether, in the event of non-issuance of the No Objection Certificate, the competent authority was required to pass and communicate a reasoned speaking order within the prescribed period.

3. Whether the pending application should be directed to be brought to finality instead of keeping the writ petition pending.

The Court applied Section 21A of the Registration Act, 1908, as amended in Assam, which requires the Deputy Commissioner either to issue a No Objection Certificate containing the description of the immovable property or to issue a speaking order stating the reasons for non-issuance within thirty days of receipt of the application.

It relied on the Standard Operating Procedure notified on 9 September 2025, which prescribes the procedure involving reports from the Circle Officer and Special Branch and requires the District Commissioner to issue the NOC, reject the proposal, or seek further clarification; it also requires a speaking order if the application is not disposed of within thirty days.

The Court further applied the Assam Right to Public Services Act, 2012, under which an eligible person has a right to obtain a notified public service within the stipulated period, and the designated public servant must either provide the service or reject the application by recording and communicating reasons.

The Notification dated 11 November 2022 declared “Composite Land Sale Transfer” a notified service, designated the Deputy Commissioner or his nominee as the Designated Public Servant, and prescribed a forty-five-day period for delivery of the service.

The Court also relied on the principle that administrative decisions affecting rights must be supported by reasons, particularly where the decision implicates the petitioner’s constitutional and human right to property under Article 300A.

The Court found that the petitioner’s application had remained unresolved for more than a year, despite the statutory requirement under Section 21A and the time-bound framework under the Assam Right to Public Services Act and the relevant notifications.

The forwarding of the application between different authorities and its reference to the Special Branch did not discharge the respondents’ obligation to bring the process to a final decision.

Since the authorities had not yet finally allowed or rejected the application, the Court considered it appropriate to direct completion of the process rather than keep the writ petition pending.

The Court required the District Commissioner to comply with Section 21A, the 9 September 2025 SOP and the 11 November 2022 notification.

It further protected procedural fairness by directing that any deficiency or requirement for additional documents be communicated to the petitioner in writing within fifteen days; in that event, the thirty-day period would run from the date on which the deficiencies were cured.

If any further document or clarification was required, the petitioner had to be informed in writing within fifteen days, and the thirty-day period would thereafter commence upon removal of the deficiency.