Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/18 vs Union Of India And 9 Ors on 12 February, 2026
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/18
GAHC010005912026
2026:GAU-AS:2041
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/224/2026
ABUL KASEM AND 72 ORS.
S/O- ASIM UDDIN
VILL- PADUM PUKHURI, DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM
2: AMJAT ALI
S/O- LATE AJGAR ALI.AGE- 56.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA BANANCHAL
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
3: SURAJ ALI
S/O- LATE ABDUL RAHMAN.AGE- 76.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
4: ALIM UDDIN
S/O- LATE ABDUL LATIF.AGE- 61.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
5: MD MONFARALIASMANFAR ALI
S/O- JAYNAL ABDIN.AGE- 35.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
6: MAINU UDDIN
S/O- LATE ABDUL JABBAR.AGE- 73.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
7: ALAL UDDIN
S/O- LATE RIYAJ UDDIN.AGE- 65.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/18
8: RAMJAN ALI
S/O- ABDUL MAJIT.AGE- 52.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
9: ABDUL RASID
S/O- NUR HUSSEN.AGE- 42.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA BANANCHAL
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
10: ABDUL HASIM
S/O- SAMSUL HUDA.AGE- 45.VILL- PADUM PUKHURI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
11: MUSAALIASMUCHA HAQUE
S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI.AGE- 73.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
12: ABDUL RASID
S/O- LATE AIN UDDIN.AGE- 56.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
13: AMIR HUSSEN
S/O- ABDUL RAHMEN.AGE- 51.VILL- 9 NO KHERANI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
14: GAJIBUR RAHMAN
S/O- LATE JAHUR ALI.AGE- 66.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
15: MAYAJ UDDIN
S/O- LATE RUSTAM ALI.AGE- 74VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA
BANANCHAL.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
16: NURUL HAQUE
S/O- MAFIJ ULLAALIASULLAH.AGE- 43.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
17: ABDUL MANNAN
S/O- SAMUJALIASCHAMUJ ALI.AGE- 36.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
Page No.# 3/18
18: SULEMAN HEKIM
C/O- SULTAN MUNSI.AGE- 46.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
19: MOHAMMAD MIJABUR RAHMAN
S/O- MOHAMMAD ISMAIL ALI.AGE- 39.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
20: ALIP JAN BEGUM
C/O- ISMAIL ALI.AGE- 43.VILL-9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
21: IBRAHIM ALI
S/O- ISMAIL ALI.AGE- 56.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
22: APTAB UDDIN
S/O- ABDUL JABBAR.AGE- 58.VILL- NITAI NAGOR PART1DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
23: UKAL UDDIN
S/O- ABDUL RAHIM.AGE- 47.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
24: RAJIBUL ISLAM
S/O- ABDUL SALAM.AGE- 21.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
25: ABDUL AJIT
S/O- AIN UDDIN.AGE- 58.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
26: AMIR HAMJA
S/O- AIDAR ALI.AGE- 33.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA BANANCHAL.DIST-
NAGAON
ASSAM
27: MD NABI ALIAS NABI HUSSIN ALIAS HUSSAIN
S/O- LATE ISABALIASISOB ALI.AGE- 57.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
Page No.# 4/18
ASSAM
28: SAHAMMAD ALI
S/O- LATE ABED ALI.AGE- 61.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
29: ABDUL MALEK
S/O- ABDUL RAHMAN.AGE- 61.VILL- 9 NO KHERANI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
30: SAKHINA KHATUN
S/O- TAIYAB ALI.AGE- 79.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
31: IBRAHIM ALI
S/O- ABDUL GANIALIASGONI.AGE- 59.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
32: JEHIRUL ALIAS JAHIRUL ISLAM
S/O- MEHERUL ISLAM.AGE- 45.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
BARPUKHURIPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
33: JAKIR HUSSEN
S/O- ABDUL RAHMAN.AGE- 53.VILL- 9 NO KHERANI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
34: ASADUL ISLAM
S/O- ABDUL RAHMAN.AGE- 40.VILL- 9 NO KHERANI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
35: MUCHARAF ALI
S/O- MAIDAR ALI.AGE- 56.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
36: JAKIR HUSSAIN
S/O- MAIDAR ALI.AGE- 55.VILL- 9 NO KHERANI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM.
37: KHAIRUL ISLAM
Page No.# 5/18
S/O- INSAN ALI.AGE- 59.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
38: ABUL HASEN ALIAS HASSEN
S/O- BABAR ALI.AGE- 54.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
39: HABIJ UDDIN
S/O- LATE ISAB ALI.AGE- 54.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
40: TAIYAB ALI
S/O- LATE EDIR ALI.AGE- 73VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTAB EAST
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
41: HUSSAIN ALI
S/O- LATE ABDUL MATIN.AGE- 39.VILL- KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
42: MURMUJ ALI
S/O- LATE MAHAR ALI.AGE- 72.VILL- LUTUMARI KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
43: RIYAJ UDDIN
S/O- SABED ALI.AGE- 38.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA FOREST
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
44: BABUL HUSSAIN
S/O- SARAFAT ALI.AGE- 39.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA BANANCHAL
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
45: HABIBUR RAHMAN
S/O- ALI ISLAM.AGE- 30VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA BANANCHAL
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
46: SAHUR UDDIN
S/O- SABED ALI.AGE- 52.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
Page No.# 6/18
47: JAHANGIR ALAM
S/O- ABUL HUSAN.AGE- 32.VILL- LUTUMARI MUKTA FOREST
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
48: SAMSU UDDIN
S/O- JAMDAR ALI.AGE- 31.VILL- KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
49: ABUL HUSSEN
S/O- LATE ISAB ALI.AGE- 66.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
50: JAMDAR ALI
S/O- SURJATALIASSURJYAT ALI.AGE- 56.VILL- KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
51: AFAZ UDDIN
S/O- RAJAB ALI.AGE- 56.VILL- 9 NO KHERONI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
52: SAHJAHAN ALI
S/O- ABUL KALAM.AGE- 41.VILL- KHERUNI
DAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
53: JAIN UDDIN
S/O- CHAN MIYA.AGE- 51.VILL- LONGJAP N.C.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
54: FAIJUL HAQUE
S/O- NURUL ISLAM.AGE- 51.VILL- PANDITGHAT
BARPANI.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
55: ABDUL RAHIM
S/O- LATE JULMAT ALI.AGE- 51.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA
FV.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
56: ABDUSH SALAM ALIAS ABDUL SALAM
S/O- JULMAT ALI.AGE- 69.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
Page No.# 7/18
57: BACHIR UDDIN
S/O- ALAL UDDIN.AGE- 27.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA
FV.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
58: JAHANGIR ALAM
S/O- ABDUL SATTAR.AGE- 27.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
59: IMAN ALI
S/O- KERAMATALIASKERMAT ALI.AGE- 73.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST-
NAGAON
ASSAM
60: JALAL UDDIN
S/O- AHAMMAD ALI.AGE- 51.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA
FV.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
61: RAMIJ UDDIN
S/O- MUSLEM UDDIN.AGE- 51.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA
FV.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
62: NUR JAMAL
S/O- AIN UDDIN.AGE- 41.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA FV.DIST-
NAGAON
ASSAM
63: RIYAJ UDDIN
S/O- ALAL UDDIN.AGE- 33.VILL- LONGJUP PADUMONI HATIPARA
FV.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
64: ABDUL JABBAR
S/O- ABDUL JULMAT.AGE- 61.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
65: ABDUL SATTAR
S/O- JULMAT ALI.AGE- 71.VILL- JURIPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
66: MAHAR ALI
S/O- ACHUMUDDIN.AGE- 45.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
67: SAHAHNAJ BEGUM
Page No.# 8/18
C/O- ABDUL RAHIM.AGE- 38.VILL- JURIRPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
68: MUKTARUL ISLAM
S/O- ABDUL RAHMAN.AGE- 20.VILL- JURIPAR.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
69: AIJUL HOQUE
S/O- NURUL ISLAM.AGE- 60.VILL- PANDITGHAT
BARPANI BAGAN.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
70: SAFIQUL ISLAM
S/O- ALI AKBAR.AGE- 45.VILL-KANDAPARA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
71: MAHAMMAD ALI
SON OF MANIR UDDIN
VILLAGE JURIR PAR
NAGAON
ASSAM
72: SAMSUDDIN
S/O-SOMED ALI.AGE- 79.VILL-JURIRPAR BARPANI.DIST- NAGAON
ASSAM
73: KAMAL UDDIN
VILL-CHANAKHOLA.DIST- NAGAON
ASSA
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND 9 ORS.
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND
CLIMATE CHANGE, INDIRA PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, JORBAGH ROAD,
NEW DELHI, INDIA
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
OF ASSAM
JANATA BHAWAN ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006
3:SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT
JANATA BHAWAN ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX
Page No.# 9/18
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006
4:COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
JANATA BHAWAN
ASSAM SECRETARIAT COMPLEX
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006
5:PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF FOREST
FORCE AND WILDLIFE
O/O THE PCCF AND HOFF
ASSAM
ARANYA BHAWAN
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI- 781037.
6:DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
NAGAON DIVISION
NAGAON
ASSAM.
7:DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
NAGAON
ASSAM
8:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
NAGAON
ASSAM
9:CIRCLE OFFICER
KAMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE
NAGAON ASSAM.
10:OFFICER IN CHARGE
KACHUA POLICE STATION
NAGAON
ASSA
Page No.# 10/18
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. R. Adhikari, CGC
: Mr. D. Gogoi, Standing Counsel
: Ms. P. R. Mahanta, Standing Counsel
: Mr. S. S. Roy, Government Advocate
· Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A
· Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 12.02.2026
· Whether the pronouncement is of
the Operative Part of the Judgment : No
· Whether the full Judgment has been
Pronounced : Yes
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. M. R. Adhikari, the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Mr. D. Gogoi, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 6; Ms. P. R. Mahanta, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.4; Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 7 to 10.
2. Seventy-three (73) writ Petitioners joined together to file the instant writ petition challenging the notice dated 08.12.2025 issued by the Respondent Authorities and further seeking that the Respondent Authorities be restrained from disturbing the peaceful possession of the Petitioners and carrying out any demolition or Page No.# 11/18 eviction in respect to their houses and residential plots at Padum Pukhuri, Dapara, Lutumari Mukta Bananchal, Dapara, 9 No. Kheroni @ Kherani, Dapara, Kheroni Dapara, Longjup N.C., Panditghat, Barpani, Longjup Padumoni (Hatipara Forest Village), Jurirpar, Nagaon District.
3. The Petitioners have also sought for directions that the Respondents should provide benefits to the Petitioners under the National Food Security Act, 2013; Right to Education Act, 2009 and the Assam Panchayat Act, 1995 and all other necessary benefits.
4. This Court enquired with Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners in respect to the prayer pertaining to seeking directions in respect to National Food Security Act, 2013; Right to Education Act, 2009 and the Assam Panchayat Act, 1995 and he submitted that the Petitioners would be well advised not to insist the said prayer in the present proceedings and if there is any violation to the provisions of the said Acts, the Petitioners be granted the liberty to agitate the same by way of separate writ petition. The prayer being reasonable, liberty is granted to the Petitioners to agitate their grievances in respect to the infraction of the provisions of the aforesaid by way of separate writ petition(s).
Page No.# 12/18
5. In the backdrop of the above, this Court therefore takes up the instant writ petition only on the question pertaining to the challenge to the notice dated 08.12.2025 issued by the Respondent Authorities as well as the eviction which is sought to be carried out by the Respondent Authorities on the basis of the impugned notice dated 08.12.2025.
6. The case of the Petitioners herein are that they have been residing in the villages of Padum Pukhuri, Dapara, Lutumari Mukta Bananchal, Dapara, 9 No. Kheroni @ Kherani, Dapara, Kheroni Dapara, Longjup N.C., Panditghat, Barpani, Longjup Padumoni (Hatipara Forest Village), Jurirpar, Nagaon District for many years. It is claimed by the Petitioners that the original pattadars through lawful and valid means have granted the Petitioners permission to reside upon the said lands and cultivate the lands.
7. On 08.12.2025, notices were issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon Forest Division to the various Petitioners. The Petitioners apprehended that on the basis of the said notice dated 08.12.2025, the Petitioners would be evicted and as such, the Petitioners have approached this Court.
8. This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf Page No.# 13/18 of the parties including the counsel who appears on behalf of the Forest Department.
9. Mr. D. Gogoi, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Forest Department submitted that the said notices were issued in pursuance to the directions passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the Judgment dated 18.08.2025 passed in Writ Appeal No.251/2025 and Writ Appeal No.252/2025. He further submitted that against the said judgment passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court dated 18.08.2025, Special Leave to Appeals were filed before the Supreme Court and vide a judgment dated 10.02.2026, the Supreme Court disposed of those appeals by issuing certain directions. The learned Standing counsel further submitted that in view of the said observations and directions made by the Supreme Court, the Forest Department now would take steps in accordance with the said directions passed.
10. This Court enquired with Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners as to whether the lands in question wherein the Petitioners are residing fall within the reserved forest. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the lands under their occupation no doubt are reserved forest land but they were issued settlement certificates for temporary Page No.# 14/18 settlement under the Tonguya/Tangiya system in the year 1974.
11. This Court has duly perused the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others Vs. The State of Assam and Others dated 10.02.2026. A perusal of the said judgment reveals that while those appeals were pending before the Supreme Court, an additional affidavit was filed on 18.01.2026 by the State of Assam, the contents of which were reproduced in the said judgment. The Supreme Court at paragraph No.12 of the said judgment delineated the policy decision of the State of Assam to remove unauthorized occupation from the reserve forest. In addition to that, the Supreme Court also observed at Paragraph No.13 that on behalf of the State of Assam, the learned Solicitor General has assured that the mechanism evolved by the State shall be complied with objectively and with fairness while taking action for removal of unauthorized occupation in the reserved forest.
12. Taking into account the said, this Court finds it relevant to reproduce paragraph Nos. 12 and 13 of the said judgment in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others (supra).
"12. Thus, from perusal of aforesaid additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the following policy decision to remove unauthorised occupation from the reserved forest has been taken:
Page No.# 15/18
(i) The respondents shall constitute a committee comprising forest officials and the revenue officials.
(ii) The said committee shall issue notice to the alleged unauthorised occupants and shall give them an opportunity to adduce evidence to show that they have the right to occupy the land which is in their possession.
(iii) The action for removal of encroachment shall be taken, only if it is found that there is an encroachment in the reserved forest area.
(iv) In case the noticee is found to be within the revenue limits, outside the notified forest area, the details of the noticee shall be sent to the revenue department. In such cases, revenue department shall decide the future course of action.
(v) The action is being taken by the State to remove encroachment from the reserved forest areas and has nothing to do in respect of the matters which may be referred to the revenue department.
(vi) If an unauthorised occupation is found in a reserved forest area, after scrutiny of the documents, a speaking order shall be passed and shall be served on the concerned person giving him 15 days notice to vacate the unauthorized occupation and only Page No.# 16/18 after expiry of the period of notice, the action shall be taken to remove the unauthorised occupants.
(vii) Occupation of a Gaon Panchayat in a forest is permissible if there is a sufficient proof as per the Jamabandi Register maintained by the Forest Department or as provided under the Forest Rights Act.
13. In our opinion, the course of action to be adopted by the State Government while removing the encroachment from the reserved forest contains sufficient procedural safeguards. The process sought to be adopted by the State Government for removal of encroachment conforms to the principles of fairness, reasonableness and due process. Learned Solicitor General has assured us that the mechanism evolved by the State shall be complied with objectively and with fairness while taking action for removal of unauthorised occupation in the reserved forests. The parties are directed to maintain status quo in respect of land in occupation of the appellants/writ petitioners till speaking order is passed and till expiry of notice period of 15 days. All contentions are kept open to be agitated before the committee. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the claim of the parties, as the same has to be examined by the committee."
13. In view of the observations made by the Supreme Court at Paragraph Nos. 12 and 13, it is the opinion of this Court that the Page No.# 17/18 instant writ petition can be disposed of in the similar manner thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to carry out the required procedure and steps in terms with the directions passed by the Supreme Court at Paragraph Nos. 12 and 13 in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others (supra) as quoted herein above.
14. Accordingly, the instant writ petition therefore stands disposed of with directions upon the Respondent Authorities more particularly the Forest Department, Revenue Department, District Administration as well as the Police Authorities who are parties to the instant proceedings to comply as per the directions passed by the Supreme Court at Paragraph Nos. 12 and 13 in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others (supra).
15. Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that some form of interim directions may be given.
16. At Paragraph No.13 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others (supra), the Supreme Court has categorically mentioned that the parties were directed to maintain status quo in respect of land in occupation till Speaking Orders are passed. The Petitioners therefore are also entitled to Page No.# 18/18 similar directions to the extent that the parties herein shall maintain status quo in respect to the land in occupation of the Petitioners till the directions in terms with Paragraph No.12 of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Khalek and Others (supra) are not complied with.
17. This Court has not decided on the merits of the inter-se dispute while passing the instant judgment which shall be decided by the Committee to be constituted as per the judgment of the Supreme Court.
18. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.
JUDGE Bijoy Saha Digitally signed by Bijoy Saha Date: 2026.02.13 10:56:24 +05'30' Comparing Assistant