Section 21A mandates disposal of land-transfer NOC applications within thirty days through issuance or a speaking order.

The petitioners, being the owners and proposed purchaser of land covered by Dag No. 588 and Patta No. 305 at Mouza Rajabari, Sribhumi, entered into an Agreement for Sale dated 16 January 2026 for transfer of 7 Kathas, 7 Chataks and 7 Gandas of land for a consideration of ₹51,00,000.

Since the online facility for applying for a No Objection Certificate (“NOC”) was unavailable in the concerned area owing to incomplete survey operations, the petitioners submitted an offline NOC application before the competent authority on 11 February 2026.

The application remained undecided for more than five months, leading the petitioners to file the writ petition seeking directions for its expeditious disposal.

The respondents accepted that an offline application was permissible in the circumstances, but contended that it had to be processed under the Standard Operating Procedure (“SOP”) notified on 9 September 2025.

1. Whether the respondent authorities were required to decide the petitioners’ application for an NOC under Section 21A of the Registration Act, 1908, within the prescribed period of thirty days or issue a speaking order explaining the refusal or delay.

2. Whether the SOP notified on 9 September 2025 for inter-religious transfers of land applied to the petitioners’ proposed transaction, where the sellers and purchaser belonged to the same religious community.

3. Whether a direction should be issued to the respondent authorities to bring the NOC process to its conclusion.

The Court applied Section 21A of the Registration Act, 1908, as amended by the Registration (Assam Amendment) Acts of 2009 and 2021, which requires a No Objection Certificate from the Deputy Commissioner before registration of specified instruments relating to immovable property.

The proviso to Section 21A mandates that the NOC be issued within thirty days of receipt of the application and, if it is not issued, that a speaking order giving reasons be passed within the same period.

The Court also considered the SOP notified by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department on 9 September 2025, which prescribes the procedure for NOCs concerning transfers of land where the buyers and sellers belong to different religious communities, including reports from the Circle Officer, Nodal Officer and Special Branch.

The Court held that the statutory thirty-day time limit under Section 21A applied to the processing and disposal of the NOC application.

The Court found that the petitioners had submitted their NOC application on 11 February 2026 and that it had remained pending for over five months, despite Section 21A prescribing a thirty-day period for issuance of the NOC or passing of a reasoned order.

It further held that the SOP dated 9 September 2025 was not applicable because, on the admitted facts, the proposed sellers and purchaser belonged to the same religious community; the SOP specifically concerned inter-religious land transfers.

In view of the prolonged inaction and the statutory mandate, the Court considered it appropriate to direct the authorities, particularly the District Commissioner, to complete the process rather than keep the writ petition pending.

If any further document or clarification was required, the authorities were directed to communicate the deficiency to the petitioners in writing within fifteen days of receiving the order; in that event, the thirty-day period would run from the date on which the petitioners cured the deficiency.

No order as to costs was made.