Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 589 (GAU)

Biswajit Goswami v. State of Assam

2017-05-16

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

body2017
JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.D. Das, learned senior counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 as well as Mr. D. Nath, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 9 and Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.10. 2. In the year, 1999, the respondent No.4 being the Assam State Cooperative Housing Federation Society Ltd., (in short House fed) had invited an application for allotment of certain plots of land at Juripar in Guwahati under the Beltola Mouza. The procedure was that the House fed initially purchased a compact plot of land measuring 12 bighas 1 katha 14 lec has Dag Nos. 388, 389 and 392 (New 609) and Patta No.90, 119 (new 579) at village Dwarandha under Beltola Mouza from its original owners. Thereafter, certain developments were undertaken over the plot of land and the purchased plot of land was divided into 30 plots by providing connecting and internal roads. 3. According to the terms, the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) as the registration cum booking amount. Thereafter, the petitioner was informed that the cost of land was fixed at Rs. 140 per. Sq. ft and accordingly, by the letter dated 30.08.2001, the petitioner was required to pay a value of the land. As per the letter dated 11.03.2002 of the respondent House fed, the petitioner was required to pay a total cost of Rs.4,67,300/- (Rupees Four Lakh Sixty Seven Thousand Three Hundred) Only. Ultimately, as per the arrangement between the parties, the petitioner was required to pay a total amount of Rs.4,50,930/- (Rupees Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty), being the full and final payment in consideration of the plot of land to be allotted to him. Thereafter, upon payment of the entire amount, the plot No.21 measuring 3328.07sq.ft was handed over to the petitioner and accordingly, the petitioner took over possession on 18.04.2002. In this respect, the respondent House fed had also issued certificate of possession on 02.05.2002. It is also stated that the required sale deed between the House fed and the petitioner was executed on 06.03.2005 after taking necessary permission from the Guwahati Development Authority and Guwahati Municipal Corporation. 3. In this respect, the respondent House fed had also issued certificate of possession on 02.05.2002. It is also stated that the required sale deed between the House fed and the petitioner was executed on 06.03.2005 after taking necessary permission from the Guwahati Development Authority and Guwahati Municipal Corporation. 3. It is also the case of the petitioner that while the petitioner was enjoying his peaceful possession of the land in question, the respondent No.10, started to trouble the petitioner over his possession on the basis of certain extraneous consideration and because of such interference, the petitioner was receiving serious threats to his life and also to the concerned property. It is stated that the said respondent No.10 on 19.07.2010 had made an attempt to take over the possession of the land of the petitioner along with three other plots being plot Nos. 19, 20 and 22 and hand over the same to certain land grabbers in connivance with some of the supporting officials. Even on being approached by the petitioners, the said respondent No.10 refused to hear the petitioner and the other person. 4. In the circumstance, this writ petition has been preferred for a direction to the respondent authorities to protect the life and property of the petitioner and for allowing him to retain peaceful possession of his plot No.21 standing on Dag No.(pt) 609(N) of K.P. Patta No.579(N) of Juripar, which was allotted to him by the respondent House fed. This Court by the order dated 30.05.2011 had provided in the interim, that the respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 being the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) Guwahati, Senior Superintendent of Police, Guwahati City and the Officer-in-Charge of Dispur Police Station were directed to take all required steps to protect the property and belongings of the petitioner as regards the land measuring 3328.07 sq. ft of plot No.21 under Dag No.(pt) 609 (new) at KP Patta No.579 (new) Juripar which had been developed by the respondent House fed. It is stated that in the meantime, certain actions had also been taken on the administrative side against the respondent No.10, who was initially placed under suspension, which was subsequently revoked and as submitted by Mr. Nath, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, certain punishments were also imposed upon him. 5. In the aforesaid circumstance, learned senior counsel, Mr. It is stated that in the meantime, certain actions had also been taken on the administrative side against the respondent No.10, who was initially placed under suspension, which was subsequently revoked and as submitted by Mr. Nath, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, certain punishments were also imposed upon him. 5. In the aforesaid circumstance, learned senior counsel, Mr. T.J. Mahanta submits that presently the petitioner is peacefully enjoying his plot of land and there is no disturbance from any quarter. 6. In such view of the matter, as agreed by the respective parties including the respondent No.10 that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction that the respondent No.10 would not interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in any manner, without following the due procedure of law. 7. In terms of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by providing that none of the respondents, more particularly the respondent No.10 shall disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner in respect of the plot No.21 measuring 3328.07 under Dag No.(pt) 609 (new) at KP Patta No.579 (new) Juripar. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.