Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/4512/2026 of MAKBUL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA AND 7 ORS Vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS on 8 September 2026
GAHC010176172026 2026:GAU-AS:13170 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4512/2026 MAKBUL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA AND 7 ORS SON OF LATE ABDUL JALIL BARBHUIYA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II, P.O. KASHIPUR,P.S. SILCHAR,
GAHC010176172026
2026:GAU-AS:13170
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4512/2026
MAKBUL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA AND 7 ORS
SON OF LATE ABDUL JALIL BARBHUIYA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II, P.O. KASHIPUR,P.S. SILCHAR, DISTRICT
CACHAR, ASSAM
2: MUNNA SODIAL
SON OF LATE MERAB ALI SODIAL
VILLAGE/P.O. MODHURBOND
P.S. SILCHAR
DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM
3: KAMRUL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA
SON OF LATE ABDUL JALIL BARBHUIYA
VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II
P.O. KASHIPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DISTRICT CACHAR
ASSAM
4: ANJAL HUSSAIN BARLASKAR
SON OF NUR AHMED BARLASKAR
VILLAGE BAHADURPUR RONGPUR PART II
P.O. RONGPUR
P.S. UDHARBOND
DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM
5: DILBAHAR HUSSAIN CHOUDHURY
SON OF LATE AMIN ALI CHOUDHURY
VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II
P.O. KASHIPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
6: RAJAN UDDIN MAZUMDER
Page No.# 2/5
SON OF HARIS ALI MAZUMDER
VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART I
P.O. KASHIPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM
7: JIAUR RAHMAN BARBHUIYA
SON OF LATE ABDUL MATIN BARBHUIYA
VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II
P.O. KASHIPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM
8: AHAD HUSSAIN LASKAR
SON OF NASIR UDDIN LASKAR
VILLAGE KASHIPUR PART II
P.O. KASHIPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSA
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAWAN
1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI 110001
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
3:THE COMMISSIONER OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
PANJABARI GUWAHATI 37
4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY OF LAND
ACQUISITION
CACHAR SILCHAR
5:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY OF LAND ACQUISITION
CACHAR SILCHAR
6:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LTD (NHIDCL)
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
NHIDCL
CACHAR
SILCHAR
7:THE ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER
SADAR REVENUE CIRCLE
SILCHAR
CACHAR
8:THE SECRETARY
KASHIPUR GAON PANCHAYAT
VILLAGE KASHIPUR
P.O. KASHIPUR
DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM
PIN 78800
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. K. Sarma, CGC
Mr. N. Goswami, Govt. Advocate
Ms. N. Borah, Standing Counsel
Mr. R.K. Talukdar, Standing Counsel
Ms. G. Hazarika, Standing Counsel
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 09.09.2026
Heard Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. K. Sarma, the learned CGC appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1; Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2; Ms. N. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 8; Mr. N. Goswami, the learned
Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 7; and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 6.
2. The petitioners herein are aggrieved by the determination of compensation in terms with Section 3G(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 by the respondent No. 5 who is the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition without taking into account the value of the houses and other immovable properties standing on the land.
3. It is the opinion of this Court that the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy in terms with Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 and as such, this is not a fit case in which this Court should entertain the writ petition by issuing notice.
4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.
5. It is, however, made clear that the instant writ petition is dismissed on the ground that the same is not being entertained in view of the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy.
6. The dismissal of the writ petition shall not prejudice or preclude the petitioners from seeking a reference in terms with Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 before the learned Arbitrator.
7. It is relevant to take note of that the learned Arbitrator shall consider the same within the purview of Section 3G(7) of the National Highways Act, 1956 read with Sections 26 to 30 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and also keeping in mind the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of National Highways Authority of India Vs. P. Nagaraju @ Cheluvaiah & Another reported in (2022) 15 SCC 1.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant