WP(C)/5841/2024 of BINOY KUMAR NATH Vs THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL AND 5 ORS on 12 May 2026

ORDER

Date : 13.05.2026 Heard Mr. B. J. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. C. Muchahary, learned Standing Counsel, BTC appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 and Mr. N. Das, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4.

2. By way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks issuance of an appropriate direction to the respondent authorities, particularly respondent No. 5, to complete the demarcation process in respect of the petitioner’s land in accordance with law.

3. The brief facts, as pleaded, are that the petitioner purchased the subject plot of land in the year 2001. Thereafter, his name came to be duly mutated in the record of rights, and a fresh patta was issued in his favour. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the Circle Officer, Dotma, seeking demarcation of the boundaries of the said land. It appears that pursuant thereto, the Lot Mandal undertook a measurement exercise and found that only 12 lechas of land were under the petitioner’s possession as against the recorded extent of 15 lechas, thereby indicating a shortfall of approximately 3 lechas. Despite repeated approaches made by the petitioner before the concerned authorities, including submission of representations before the Circle Officer and the District Commissioner, no effective action was taken for completion of the demarcation process. Left with no efficacious alternative in the matter, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present proceedings.

4. Before adverting to the merits of the controversy, it deserves to be noted that the limited grievance raised by the petitioner is with regard to the non- completion of the demarcation process concerning the subject land. The petitioner’s representation dated 10.01.2024, addressed to the District Commissioner, clearly reflects the nature of the grievance and is reproduced hereunder: “Date: 10.01.2024 To, The District Commissioner, Kokrajhar, BTR, Assam Sub: Request to direct the Circle Officer to complete the demarcation process of my land. Sir, I am a retired person having a landed property at Dhopertal, Fakiragram under Dotma Revenue Cirlce, Kokrajhar district and I had applied for demarcation of my plot of land before the Circle Office, Dotma. Though the demarcation process was started and Lat Mondal measured my plot and found that around 3 lechas of my land was encroached by someone else, yet the circle officer did not complete the process of demarcation. As a result, I am not in a position to understand from which direction/side 3 lechas of my land is encroached. You are requested to direct the Circle Officer to complete the process of demarcation at the earliest, so that no further complication arise in future.

Thanking you, Binoy Kumar Walh Sri Binoy Kr. Nath S/O Late Debeswar Nath P.O.:

Fakiragram,

P.S.: Fakiragram Dist.: Kokrajhar, BTR, Assam Description of my land: A plot of land measuring 15 lechas covered by Dag 16 of Patta No. 99 of village: Dhopertal, Revenue Circle: Dotma, Dist.: Kokrajhar, BTR, Assam.”

5. A perusal of the report of the Lot Mandal, annexed to the writ petition, reveals that upon measurement, only 12 lechas of land were found in the petitioner’s possession, whereas the recorded landholding is 15 lechas. The report further indicates that the remaining 3 lechas were not found to be in the petitioner’s possession. The relevant extract reads as follows: “To, The Learned Circle Officer, Dotma Revenue Circle Sub-Regarding demarcation/measurement of land. Sir/Madam, It is stated that the applicant Sri. Binoy Kumar Nath, S/o- Debeswar Nath, resident of village Dhopertal, P.O. & P.S Fakiragram, Dist- Kokrajhar (BTC), Assam. The application made by the applicant for demarcation of his land measuring 15 Lechas under aforesaid Dag No. 16 of periodic patta

No. 99 of village Dhopertal under Dotma Revenue Circle though as per record the land measures 15 Lechas, but on measurement I found 12 Lechas under his possession. And the remaining 3 Lechas of land is not in the possession of the applicant. This report is therefore submitted before your good office.

S/d D.A for applicant S/d- Circle Officer Dotma Revenue Circle Dotma”

6. Having considered the materials placed on record, this Court is of the view that when a landholder seeks demarcation of his recorded landholding and the preliminary measurement itself indicates a discrepancy between the recorded extent and the actual possession, the competent revenue authorities are expected to carry the process to its logical conclusion in accordance with law. Mere initiation of the process without its completion would leave the grievance unresolved and may potentially give rise to avoidable disputes.

7. In the present case, despite representations submitted by the petitioner, the demarcation process has remained incomplete. In such circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of any competing claim over the land in question, this Court deems it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to direct the concerned authority, particularly respondent No. 5, to complete the demarcation process in respect of the petitioner’s land strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall serve a copy of this order, along with a copy of the writ petition, upon respondent No. 5 forthwith for necessary compliance.

9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant