WP(C) 6192/2006 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B K SHARMA Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Goswami, lea rned State counsel. The grievance raised in this application is in respect of alleged illega l action on the part of the respondents No. 4 and 6 in taking steps towards evic ting the petitioner from her leased hold land with dwelling house. The descripti on of the land has been indicated in paragraph-2 of the writ petition. According to the petitioner she along with her family members is in occupation of the lan d since 1975. She has her Assam type house over the plot of land which according to the petitioner has been given house number (House No. 120) by the competent authority. According to the petitioner the officials of the respondents No. 4 and 6 came to the petitioners dwelling house and took measurement thereof. They also asked the petitioner to vacate the dwelling house over the land. According to th e petitioner, she was threatened that in case of her failing to vacate the land and the house she will be vacated forcefully. The respondents in their counter affidavit had contended that the Deed o f leased agreement which has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition is not a registered one and the petitioner cannot get any benefit from such leased agreement. It is the further contention of the respondents that in the State of Meghalaya there cannot be any transfer of land without the prior permission of t he competent authority. However, the real reason assigned for taking the action is given in paragraph-3 of the counter affidavit which is quoted below: 3. That with regard to the statements made in paragraphs 4 to 10 of the petitio n, the deponent begs to state that on 08.12.2006, a team consisting of officials from the Collector’s Office, Police Department along with the Officials of Megh alaya Surveys were deputed to conduct survey over the land at Khanapara, Ri Bhoi District, purportedly belonging to Shri P. Lyngdoh. This survey was conducted f or the purpose of proposed acquisition of land for establishment of Khanapara Po lice Station which is required to be shifted from the present position due to th e on going construction of the 4 laning N.H. 37. The survey team while conductin g the survey being accompanied by the Headman of the respective village along wi th the landowner’s representative etc. found that some buildings were to be affe cted for the proposed acquisition. The team while taking measurement to find out the actual area of land which is required to be taken for acquisition had to ta ke measurement of the buildings within the area so that the valuation can be mad e in the probable cost estimate for the entire acquisition. The said measurement was only a preliminary step which was taken by maintaining all the requisite pr ovisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended from time to time. In this particular operation of acquisition of land, notices will be issued under the p rovisions of Section-4 and objections will be invited thereafter under Section  5(A) of the said act. From the stand of the respondents it appears that some measurements have been taken as preliminary measure towards acquiring the land for the purpose of construction of Police Station which according to the respondents is required t o be shifted from the present place due to ongoing construction of the 4 lane ro ad. However, the respondents have also stated that the steps taken is only preli minary steps and any action taken in the matter would be by following the provis ion of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 and notice etc. shall be issued in due cou rse. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has obta ined no objection certificate from the Smt. J. Syiemlieh. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of providing that th e petitioner shall not be evicted from the land and the dwelling house without f ollowing due procedure as laid down in law. JUDGE Kborah