SIROJA BEGUM Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.S. Deka, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. D.K. Das, learned counsel representing respondent Nos. 4 to 8.

(2.) This writ petition has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 12-05- 2011 passed by the Chairman, Assam Board of Revenue, Guwahati in Case No. 02 RA(Dhubri)/2010 allowing the appeal filed by the private respondents thereby setting aside the order dated 10-01-2009 passed by the Circle Officer, Chapar by means of which, the names of the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners was recorded in place of his deceased father Mokshed Ali along with Md. Suleman Sk.

(3.) It appears that land measuring 4B-2K-16L situated in village- Kazipara Part-I covered by Dag No. 498 of Patta No. 20, Dag No. 497 of Patta No. 225 and Dag No. 742 of Patta No. 519 was recorded in the name of Md. Mokshed Ali. Md. Mokshed Ali had three sons, viz. Samsul Sheikh, Sirajuddin and Sheyesuddin and five daughters. Sheyesuddin died unmarried. Sirajuddin, i.e. the predecessor-in-interest of the writ petitioners predeceased his father Md. Mokshed Ali. After the death of Mokshed Ali who died in the year 1992, the record was corrected by including the name of Md. Samsul Haque, i.e. the predecessor-in-interest of the private respondents in place of the pattadar Mokshed Ali. However, the names of the writ petitioners, being the legal heirs of Sirajuddin, were not included in the record of rights. Having come to know about the said fact, the petitioners had applied for inclusion of their names in the revenue record as legal heirs of Sirajuddin. By the order dated 10-01-2009 the learned Circle Officer had allowed the said prayer. The order dated 10-01-2009 was taken in an appeal by predecessor-in- interest of the private respondents which was rejected by the Settlement Officer, Dhubri and Kokrajhar by the order dated 27-10-2009 passed in Mutation Appeal No. 16/2006. Aggrieved by the order dated 27-10-2009, the respondent No. 4 to 8 had preferred the revenue appeal registered as Case No. 02RA(Dhubri)/2010 which was allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 12-05-2011. Hence, this petition.