WP(C)/4836/2026 of BIMAL BAISHYA AND 4 ORS Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS on 2 September 2026

ORDER

Date : 03.09.2026

Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. S. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Department of Housing & Urban Affairs, Government of Assam, GMDA & GMC for the respondent nos. 1 – 4; Ms. P. Thapa, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural Development [P&RD] Department for the respondent no. 5; and Mr. B.P. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 & 7/caveators.

2. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it has emerged that the petitioners have already approached the appellate authority under the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority [GMDA] Act, 1985 to challenge legality and validity of an Order dated 19.11.2025 passed by the respondent no. 3, which is the original order as regards demolition of alleged unauthorised construction, erected by the petitioners. The original Order dated 19.11.2025 was followed subsequently with issuance of consequential orders. Along with the appeal, which has been registered and numbered as Misc. Appeal no. 32/2026, the petitioners have also filed an application seeking condonation of delay of 195 days, which had occurred in preferring the appeal. The said application for condonation of delay has been registered and numbered as Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026. Upon registrations of the appeal and the application as Misc. Appeal no. 32/2026 and registration of the application Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026, both of them were taken by the Appellate Authority on 04.07.2026. In Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026, the Appellate Authority issued notices to the opposite parties on 04.07.2026. All the opposite parties were represented before the Appellate Authority on 04.07.2026. The Appellate Authority posted the matter on 20.08.2026 for SR / Appearance / Written Objection [if any].

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that on 20.08.2026, the Presiding Officer of the Appellate Authority was not holding Court. The next date posted for consideration of Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026 is on 25.09.2026.

4. Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the urgency for filing this writ petition has occurred due to issuance of two orders, dated 29.08.2026 and dated 31.08.2026, under the hand of the respondent no. 3. By the Order dated 29.08.2026, the process of demolition was scheduled on 31.08.2026. However, on 31.08.2026, the demolition was not undertaken. But on 31.08.2026 itself, another order for demolition has been issued by the respondent no. 3 re-scheduling the date of demolition on 07.09.2026. It is submitted that in view of the fact that the hearing of the application for condonation of delay, Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026 is scheduled on 25.09.2026 and the decision regarding condonation of delay or otherwise has not yet been rendered by the Appellate Authority, the connected appeal, Misc. Appeal Case no. 32/2026 is not to be taken up till 25.09.2026, wherein the petitioners as appellants have also made a prayer for interim order of stay of the original order of demolition dated 19.11.2025.

5. As the Original Order dated 19.11.2025 is the subject-matter of the appeal, Misc. Appeal Case no. 32/2026, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition in view of its earlier Order passed in the writ petitions, W.P.[C] no. 3459/2026 and W.P.[C] no. 3791/2026.

6. Learned Senior Counsel has submitted that in the above backdrop, as the date of demolition is scheduled on 07.09.2026, the petitioners intend to file an application before the Appellate Authority to make a prayer to re-schedule/prepone the date of hearing of Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026 on 05.09.2026.

7. In view of the above submission made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, this writ petition is closed, with the observation that in the event the petitioners file an application for the above purpose on 05.09.2026, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same in accordance with law. The opposite parties in Misc. [J] Case no. 28/2026 are represented by Mr. S. Borah and Mr. B.P. Borah before this Court today and they have submitted that they would appear before the Appellate Authority on 05.09.2026, in case they are served with an advance copy of the application to be filed by the petitioners before the Appellate Authority on 05.09.2026. It is observed that the Appellate Authority in the event of filing such application will consider the said application on its own merits, after hearing the parties, and in accordance with law.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant