HERILLA M. SANGMA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. AS Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. ND Chullai, learned Sr. GA assisted by Mr. S. Sen Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE present writ petitioner is assailing the impugned order dated 24.07.2014 passed by the respondent No. 2 only on the ground that before passing the impugned order, the procedure prescribed under Section 4 of the Meghalaya Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1980 (for short 'the Act of 1980') was not followed. To the contra, Mr. ND Chullai, learned Sr. GA appearing for the respondents contended that there is no documentary evidence to show that the petitioner is the Patta holder of the land -in -question. Section 4 of the said Act of 1980 clearly provides that the Deputy Commissioner or the authority concerned, shall give an opportunity to the alleged unauthorized occupants to produce any evidence in support of their claim/case and after giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, necessary order may be passed. Mr. AS Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no reasonable opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order dated 24.07.2014. For easy reference, Section 4 of the said Act of 1980 is quoted hereunder: -

(3.) THE petitioner has to approach the Deputy Commissioner (Revenue), West Garo Hills, Tura along with a certified copy of this judgment and order and till the exercise is completed in pursuance of this judgment and order, status -quo of the land -in -question shall not be disturbed.