BANIKANTA SARMA Vs. ASSAM BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein challenged the judgment/order dated 10.06.1997 passed by the learned Member, the Assam Board of Revenue, Guwahati in Case No. 55 RA (K)/ 99 and Case No. 138 RA(K)/93.

(2.) The petitioners' case can precisely be stated thus: A Hindu Religious Institution, namely, Ugratara Devalaya was the owner of land appertaining to Old Dag Nos. 3862 and 3863 at Uzanbazar, Guwahati Part I, Mouza Ulubari. The said temple locates near the main road at Uzanbazar. The entire land belonging to said Ugratara Devalaya had been acquisitioned by the State Government in exercise of power under the Assam State Acquisition of Lands Belonging to Religious or Charitable Institution of Public Nature Act, 1959 (here-in-after called as the Act of 1959) vide Notification bearing No. RRT/13/67/28 dated 1.3.1967 and RRT. 7371/33 dated 29.3.1972. During last settlement operation the old Dag No. 3862 had been renumbered in three dags viz. Dag Nos. 933, 934 and 935 and old Dag No. 3863 had been renumbered as Dag No. 932. The said land appertaining to Dag Nos. 933 and 935 had been settled with the father of writ petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup in exercise of power under Section 15 of the Act, 1959. The respondent .No. 3 having found the writ petitioner possessing some part of the land in April, 1993 started enquiring into the matter and came to learn that the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup settled the said land of Dag Nos. 933 and 935 with the writ petitioner. Hence he filed the appeal before the Assam Board of Revenue. The Assam Board of Revenue, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, by the impugned judgment quashed/set aside the order of settlement made by the Additional Deputy Commissioner measuring 16 laces.

(3.) Being aggrieved the petitioners filed this writ petition contending, inter alia, that the then Doloi Shri Sashi Kanta Sarma (respondent No. 5 being struck off) let out the said land in favour of the predecessor in interest of the petitioners, namely, one Premoda Kanta Sarma creating a lease for 25 years vide registered lease deed dated 9.3.1961. The entire land belong to Ugratara Devalaya had been acquisitioned by two Notifications dated 1.3.1967 and 29.3.1972 under Section 3 of the Act of 1959 and the Deputy Commissioner in exercise of power under Section 15 of the said Act rightly and lawfully settled the land in favour of the petitioners because of the fact that on the date of acquisition the predecessor of the petitioners, namely, Premoda Kanta Sarma had been in possession of the land as a lessee under the original owner Ugratara Devalaya but the Assam Board of Revenue having misconstrued the provision of law and having totally ignored the petitioners status cancelled the order of settlement by the impugned judgment.