Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 23 August, 2021
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010118912021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3737/2021
MCLEOD RUSSEL (INDIA) LTD. AND ANR.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1656 AND
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 4, MANGOE LANE, SURENDRA
MOHAN GHOSH SARANI, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL, 700001, OWNING
VARIOUS TEA ESTATES IN THE STATE OF ASSAM, AND OTHER STATES IN
INDIA, INCLUDING TEA ESTATE IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF HALEM
TEA ESTATE, WHICH IS SITUATED AT HALEM, BISWANATH, 784172
2: SHRI RAJ KAMAL PHUKAN
S/O LATE DILIP KAMAL PHUKAN
SENIOR MANAGER OF THE PETITIONER NO. 1 AND HAVING HIS OFFICE
AT PLOT NO. 1
EXPORT PROMOTION AND INDUSTRIAL PARK
AMINGAON
NORTH GUWAHATI 781034
KAMRUP
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE
AND DISASTER MANAGMENT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT THE ASSAM
SECRETARIATE, DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006, KAMRUP M ASSAM
2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BISWANATH HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BISWANATH CHARIALI
ASSAM
784176
3:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVL)
GOHPUR SUB DIVISION
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT GOHPUR
Page No.# 2/4
ASSAM 784176
4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
HALEM REVENUE CIRLCE
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT HALEM
784176
DIST BISWANATH
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. N UPADHYAY
Advocate for the Respondent : SR. GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 23.08.2021 The Court proceedings have been conducted through online court proceeding services.
Heard Mr. B.D. Deka, learned counsel for the writ-petitioner and Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for respondent no. 1. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Additional Senior government Advocate for respondent nos. 2-4.
Mr. Deka has submitted that the petitioner company owns and runs a tea estate, Halem Tea Estate, Sub-Division -Gohpur, District - Biswanath. A part of the land of the tea estate was found surplus admeasuring 243.01 hectares was found surplus and the same were acquired under the provisions of the Assam Fixation of Ceiling on Land Holding Act, 1956 and a statement to that effect was prepared on 24.05.1976 by the then Collector, Darrang. The district of Biswanath was a part of Darrang District on that point of time.
Page No.# 3/4 Mr. Deka has submitted that the present writ petition has been filed in respect of an area admeasuring 34.60 hectares, out of the area of 243.01 Hectares, which are highlands and not conducive for paddy cultivation, and which were allotted to 61 nos. workmen. Those workmen later on, requested the tea estate authorities to relocate them in another area of same size belonging to the tea estate. The tea estate authorities had allowed those workmen to live in an area of land belonging to the tea estate which is low lying and conducive for paddy cultivation and in exchange, the tea estate is utilizing the area of land admeasuring 34.60 hectares, originally allotted to the workmen, for tea plantation. It is the claim of the petitioner that seeking exchange of these two parcels of land it submitted a representation before the respondent no. 1 on 08.01.1990 (Annexure-D).
Mr. Deka has submitted that the fact that such a representation was submitted on behalf of the petitioner is evident from the letter dated 22.03.1990 (Annexure-E) of the Officer on Special Duty, Revenue Department written to the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur, Tezpur. The petitioner has submitted that thereafter, they have been writing to the respondent authorities seeking a decision on its representation but till date no response has been received. The petitioner is aggrieved by a notice served on them by the respondent no. 4 on 09.11.2020 under Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules in respect of the area of land admeasuring 34.60 hectares, which the tea estate is utilizing for tea cultivation after exchange. Apprehending eviction in view of such notice, the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition.
On 13.08.2021, Mr. Borpujari has sought time to seek instructions as regards the outcome of the representation dated 08.01.1990. Mr. Borpujari has further submitted that though he has sought for instruction, the same has not Page No.# 4/4 been received till date.
Issue notice, returnable on 27.09.2021.
As Mr. Borpujari has appeared and accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no. 1 and Mr. Gogoi has appeared and accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 2-4, no formal notice need to be issued to the said respondents.
The petitioner shall, however, furnish requisite number of copies of the writ petition along with the annexure to Mr. Borpujari and Mr. Gogoi within 3 (three) days.
Till the returnable date, there shall be no coercive measure in consequence of the notice dated 09.11.2020.
List the case on 27.09.2021.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant