WP(C) 1973/2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. D.R. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel, for the respondents. I have also heard Ms . B. Das, learned CGSC for the respondent No. 1. This writ petition has been filed on the apprehension that the responden ts might evict the petitioners from the land stated to be in their possession. T he description of the land is given in paragraph 7 of the writ petition. The lan d is situated in the village-Tinkopani in the district of Tinsukia. Altogether, 228 writ petitioner are involved. They are stated to be of the Schedule Tribe co mmunity. As per the averments made in this writ petition, they are in occupation of the land. The petitioners are stated to be in occupation of the land since 1992. I n paragraph 8 of the writ petition, it has been stated that the petitioners were once evicted from the land on 28.5.2006. However, they have once again settled down in the same very land. Upon a reference to Section 10 of the Assam Land Rev enue Regulation and Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Reco gnition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, it is the case of the petitioners that they are entitled to certain protection and cannot be evicted from the land. Ms. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel as well as Ms. Das, learned couns el for the respondent No. 1 submits that admittedly the petitioners are unauthor ized occupants of the land in question. They were already evicted from the land on 28.5.2006 and thus they are illegal encroacher of the land in question. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the respective case of th e parties, I dispose of the writ petition providing that the petitioners may not be evicted from the land except by following the due procedure of law, if not a lready followed. Writ petition is disposed of.