WP(C) 943/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI As both these writ petitions are closely inter-linked with each other, b oth these writ petitions are taken up, as has been sought for by the learned cou nsel for the parties, for final disposal. Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel, for the petitioner, and Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned Govt. Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State respondents. Also heard Mr. A. S. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Barpeta Zilla Parishad, which stands impleaded as respondent No .5 in W.P.(C) No. 943/2008. The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is thus: The petitioner has a n agricultural farm known as Mandia Seed Farm. The said agricultural farm is loc ated, in the district of Barpeta, covering an area of about 88 bighas of land, w hich was leased out to the petitioner by the Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Assam, for a period of five years, pursuant to a tender process, which culminat ed into an order, dated 03.01.2004, whereby the settlement, as indicated hereinb efore, was made in favour of the petitioner. The land, having been leased out to the petitioner, was being utilized by the petitioner for the purpose of carryin g out agricultural activities, such as, raising of horticultural crops, producin g seeds and seedlings. The petitioner have had been cultivating the land for the purpose of growing mustard, ahu-paddy, potatoes, chilli, other vegetable and ho rticulture crops, etc. Pursuant to the Prime Minister of India’s visit to Mandia , in connection with formal inauguration of Backward Region Grant Fund on 19.02. 2007, the district administration of Barpeta District demarcated, on 06.02.2007, 26 bighas of the petitioner’s land for the purpose of construction of helipads, stage, use of roller of J.C.B., setting of gravels etc., and another 12 bighas of land for the purpose of providing security, when the Prime Minister visits th e site. In the process, the land, measuring 26 bighas and 12 bighas aforemention ed, with standing crops, were completely damaged, by various activities, which w ere carried on by the district administration on the said land. On the basis of the representation, made by the petitioner, the District Agricultural Developmen t Officer, Barpeta, assessed the loss at a sum of Rs.3,45,718/-. As the compensa tion, so assesed, was not sufficient for the petitioner, the petitioner came to this Court with a writ application made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This application gave rise to W.P.(C) No.4628/2007. While the said writ petition (i.e., W.P.(C) No. 4628/2007) was pending, the local member of the Legi slative Assembly along with the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta, and the Chief Exec utive Officer, Barpeta Zilla Parishad, laid the foundation stone, on 13.02.2008, on the petitioner’s land for construction of a Bamboo Mat Industry at Mandia an d took over possession of about 10 bighas of land for the said purpose, which al ready stood leased out to the petitioner, and thereby deprived the petitioner of his occupation and use the said 10 bighas of land. The fact that the Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Assam, had leased out about 88 bighas of land is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that th e 10 bighas of land, which the respondents have sought to be utilized for the pu rpose of establishing Bamboo Mat Industry, forms part of the land of the petitio ner. When the land stood allotted by the Department of Agriculture to the petiti oner, the District Authorities of Barpeta District had no legal right to take ov er possession of the said 10 bighas of land, for, the allotment of land, made by the Agricultural Department has, admittedly, not been cancelled nor has the lea se, granted to the petitioner, been terminated. In such circumstances, the actio n of the District Authorities, stands impugned in W.P(C) No. 943/2008. However, the respondent No.4, namely, Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta, has, now, offered to pay Rs.6, 628/-, as compensation, for the said land measuring 1 0 bighas and the present petitioner has opted to accept the same. In the above view of the matter, W.P.(C) No. 943/2008 has virtually bec ome infructuous and shall accordingly stand disposed of with directions to the r espondents, particularly, respondent No.4, to ensure that the compensation amoun t of Rs.6,628/-, which the respondent No.4 has agreed to pay, shall be made paya ble to the petitioner within a period of one month from today. It is also made c lear that none of the respondents including the respondent No.4 shall, except in accordance with law, extend its area of operation beyond the said 10 bighas of land. Any further encroachment of the petitioner’s land by the District Authorit ies concerned may expose the respondents to appropriate action under the law. W.P.(C) No. 943/2008 shall thus stand disposed of in terms of t he observations made and directions given hereinabove. The interim directions, passed in W.P(C) No.943/ 2008, shall accordingly stand vacat ed. As far as the petitioner’s grievance with regard to damage, assesed at R s.3,45,718/-, is concerned, no agreement has been reached by the parties concern ed. W.P.(C) No. 4628/2007, shall, therefore, remain pending and will be taken up for hearing on 03.06.2008. In the meanwhile, the parties shall exchange their p leadings.