WP(C) 5003/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr RP Sarmah, learned senior counsel for the petitioners as well a s Mrs VL Singha, learned State counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1,2 & 3. Als o heard Mr R Baruah, learned counsel for respondent No.4. None appears for respo ndent No.5, despite service of notice. The petitioners, by present petitions, are challenging the eviction noti ces issued by the Addl. Dy Commissioner, Nagaon, served on them on 1 November 20 09, under Rule 18(2) of the Settlement Rules, framed under Assam Land & Revenue Regulation 1886, on the ground that the land from where they were sought to be e victed is neither the govt. khas land nor roadside land, but the municipal land and as such, the ADC has no jurisdiction to issue such notices. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners, referring to various provisi ons of Assam Municipal Act 1956, has submitted that since the land from where pe titioners were sought to be evicted belongs to Nagaon Municipal Board, the Deput y Commissioner cannot issue notice under Rule 18 of the Settlement Rules. Learne d senior counsel has further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid notices, t he petitioners had been evicted from a part of the land that had been under thei r possession, and they are still in occupation on the remaining part that belong s to Nagaon Municipal Board. Learned senior counsel, therefore, submits that unl ess it is verified whether the land belongs to the govt. or not, no further evic tion operation can be carried out on the basis of the aforesaid notices issued u nder Rule 18 of Settlement Rules. Learned State counsel, placing reliance on various averments made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the SDO (Sadar), Nagaon, has submitted that th e land which the petitioners were occupying and from where they had been evicted belongs to govt. and not to Nagaon Municipal Board. Learned State counsel, ther efore, submits that no illegality has been committed by the Additional Deputy Co mmissioner, Nagaon in issuing the notices and carrying out the eviction operatio n. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 has submitted that the land in r espect of which notices under Rule 18 of Settlement Rules have been issued belon gs to municipal board, and the petitioners are encroachers, having no existing l icence. Rule 18 of Settlement Rules, framed under Assam Land & Revenue Regulatio n 1886, authorizes the revenue authority to remove encroachers from the roadside land or reserved land or other govt. khas land. Assam Municipal Act 1956 also p rovides for eviction of any person from the municipal land. In the instant case, the dispute is whether the land relating to which n otices under Rule 18(2) were issued is a roadside land, or reserved Govt. khas l and, or municipal land. According to petitioners, the said land is municipal lan d, which is also the stand taken by respondent No.4, which, however, has been re futed by the Sub-divisional Officer (Sadar), Nagaon, contending that the land is not municipal land but a roadside land belonging to the govt.. Without ascertai ning such dispute, no direction, as sought for in present writ petition, can be issued. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a di rection to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon to verify as to whether th e land in respect of which the notices under Section 18(2) had been issued is a govt. land, or a municipal land. In the event it is found that it is a roadside land or reserved land or Govt. khas land, the Addl Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon s hall proceed further to remove the encroachers there-from. In the event it is f ound that the petitioners are in possession of municipal land, the said authorit y shall not take any further action for eviction of the petitioners from the lan d presently under their possession. In that case, it is, however, open to the respondent Board to initiate proceeding for eviction of the petitioners, if so a dvised. Both the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs.