MONMIL BORO Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of writ petitions, the challenge is against identical orders dtd. 26/3/2025 passed by the District Commissioner, Kamrup Metropolitan District, whereby the petitions for settlement of land submitted by the respective petitioners have been rejected and further action has been directed to be taken in accordance with law. For ready reference, the Speaking Order of one of the petitioners which is identical is extracted herein below:

(2.) As per the facts projected, the petitioners are in occupation of various plots of land covered by Dag No. 97 in Village: Ulubari, Mouza: Ulubari and Circle: Guwahati Revenue Circle since a long period of time and are having residential houses over the said plots. It is not in dispute that the plots of land under question is Khas land. The petitioners claim to have submitted application for settlement of the land which is under their possession. Few of the petitioners had also approached this Court in a number of writ petitions earlier which were disposed of vide order dtd. 7/11/2024 whereby a specific direction was given to give personal hearing to the aggrieved parties by the District Commissioner or his authorized representative and thereafter to pass Speaking Order. It is in connection with the aforesaid direction that a hearing had taken place culminating in the Speaking Orders dtd. 26/3/2025 which are the subject matters of challenge in this batch of writ petitions.

(3.) I have heard Shri N.N.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C)/2128/2025, Shri R. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C)/2130, 2132, 2133, 2134, 2220, 2221, 2223, 2228, 2229 and 2231 of 2025 and Shri T. Deuri, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C)/2188, 2189, 2191, 2194, 2195, 2197, 2198 and 2201 of 2025. I have also heard Shri R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and DM Department and Shri S.R. Baruah, Government Advocate, Assam.