WP(C)/4459/2026 of SRI TITU PURKAYASTHA AND 15 ORS Vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS on 23 August 2026

ORDER

Date : 24.08.2026

Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. V.K. Chopra, learned Central Government Counsel [CGC] for the respondent nos. 1 – 4; Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam for the respondent no. 5; and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Chetry, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 6 & 7.

2. The petitioners, 16 in nos., have joined together to file this writ petition stating that they are in occupation of a parcel of land since long by paying land revenue to the State respondent authorities. It is the case of the petitioners that the officials of the Railways have been visiting the parcel of land repeatedly in the recent days and have been threatening the petitioners that they would be evicted from the parcel of land on the ground that the parcel of land, which are in the occupation of the petitioners, is Railway land.

3. Mr. Bhattacharyya and Mr. Talukdar have submitted that the petitioners might be paying encroachment penalty [Bedakhali Jorimona].

4. When the writ petition was listed on 19.08.2026, Mr. Chopra, learned CGC had submitted that as per the pleadings in the writ petition, the Railway Officials had visited the parcel of land only for the purpose of taking measurements. He sought listing of the writ petition on 19.08.2026 in order to obtain instructions as regards the reasons for such visits to the parcel of land under the occupation of the petitioners, as alleged in the writ petition, by the Railway officials.

5. Today, Mr. Chopra, learned CGC on the basis of instructions received by him vide an Office Letter no. W/69/Court Case/TSK/W-4 dated 22.08.2026 from the Senior Divisional Engineer, N.F. Railway, Tinsukia [the respondent no. 3], has submitted that the visits to the parcel of land are not solely by the officials from the North-East Frontier Railway. He has submitted that the visits are being made to the parcel of land both by the officials of the North-East Frontier Railway and the State Government in order to conduct a joint survey for the purpose of identification and demarcation of Railway lands and Government lands. He has further submitted that due to obstructions created in the locality known as Natun Mati, situated at Mariani, such identification and demarcation could not be completed till date. Mr. Chopra has clarified that the respondent no. 3 in the Office Letter dated 22.08.2026 has provided an undertaking that no eviction would be carried out without following the due process of law, as provided under the Public Premises [Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants] Act, 1971.

6. Mr. Chopra has placed a copy of the Office Letter no. W/69/Court Case/TSK/W-4 dated 22.08.2026 for perusal of the Court with a submission that he has permission to place the same.

7. From the submissions of Mr. Chopra, learned CGC and the contents of the Office Letter no. W/69/Court Case/TSK/W-4 dated 22.08.2026 of the respondent no. 3, it has emerged that the visits to the parcel of land wherein the petitioners are residing, and the locality, known as Natun Mati, situated at Mariani, are by the officials of the North-East Frontier Railway and the State Government in order to conduct a survey jointly for the purpose of identification and demarcation of Railway land and the Government land. It is further submitted that it is only after identification and demarcation and after the joint survey, it would be known to the North-East Frontier Railway and the State Government about the exact status of the parcel of land under process, more particularly, on the aspect whether the parcel of land under reference is a Railway land or a State Government land and if it is Railway land, then the provisions of the Public Premises [Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants] Act, 1971 would be followed.

8. In view of the above, the apprehension raised by the petitioners in this writ petition seems to have been alleged, as there is no imminent threat of eviction. It is settled that any eviction process is to be preceded by a notice and the authorities are required to observe the procedure as laid down in law, including the principles of natural justice. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no subsisting cause of action, as on date, to proceed further with this present writ petition and the writ petition is therefore, closed. The petitioners are at liberty to take recourse to the appropriate remedy in the event of any process of eviction is initiated with regard to the parcel of land under reference.

9. The copy of the Office Letter no. W/69/Court Case/TSK/W-4 dated 22.08.2026, placed by Mr. Chopra, learned CGC, is kept with the case record by marking it as Document ‘X’.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant