WP(C) 1726/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MADAN B. LOKUR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.C.DAS The Chief Engineer, PWD (Building), Assam and the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M etro) are present in Court. This matter was taken up on the basis of a complaint made by the Rashtra Bhasha Prabhakar Hindi M.E. Vidyalaya on 3.3.2010. The allegation in the complaint was that a multistoried commercial building is coming up in the adjacent land and ca using damage to the school building. The matter was registered and notices were issued to the concerned parties. From time to time, we have been passing orders to ascertain whether any permissi on was given for the commercial building that has come up and what steps have be en taken to minimize the damage, if any, caused to the school building. There wa s also an allegation of some encroachment. By an order dated 28.6.2011, we had directed the Public Works Department of the Government of Assam to repair the damage caused to the school building and that M/s Synpack Finance Pvt. Limited who is constructing the multistoried commercia l building would bear the cost of the repairs/renovations. We had also directed the Revenue authorities to carry out a survey of the land and demarcate it under the supervision of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) and submit a report in this regard. Pursuant to our order dated 28.6.2011, a report has been filed by the Deputy Com missioner, Kamrup (Metro). This report has been prepared by the Circle Officer, Kamrup, Guwahati and is dated 9.9.2011. The report indicates that the school is not the pattadar of the land reserved for it. It is a government school running on reserved land which belongs to the Government of Assam. Insofar as M/s. Synpack Finance Pvt. Limited is concerned, the report indicates that it has not encroached on the land of the school. The report indicates that one institute that is Prateek is in possession of 0.61 Are of land on the wester n side of Dag No. 560 of the school which is proposed to be used as road. The re port also indicates that a wall has been constructed by the pattadar of Dag No. 537 on 0.07 Are of Dag No.536 belonging to the school. It is submitted by learned counsel for the School that necessary steps should be taken to evict these encroachers. This is resisted by learned counsel for the State of Assam who says that the sch ool is not the pattadar of the land and it is the State of Assam who is the owne r of the land. It is entirely for the State of Assam to take a decision with reg ard to the construction of the road on 0.61 Are of land on the western side of D ag No.560 of the school. As regards the encroachment by the pattadar of Dag No.5 37, it is submitted that necessary action may be taken if so required. We are in agreement with learned counsel for the State of Assam that since the l and does not belong to the school, it would have no independent right to require eviction of the encroacher. It is for the State of Assam to decide how the land will be utilized. But, we have no doubt that before taking any final decision i n the matter, the Government of Assam will certainly take into consideration the interest of the school, one way or the other. That apart, the dispute raised by the school is a civil dispute in nature. If th e school has any grievance with regard to the encroachment, it is, of course, at liberty to approach the Civil Court, if so advised, to establish its rights and entitlement. Insofar as the reconstruction of the damaged portion of the school building is c oncerned, learned counsel for the school says that necessary repairs and renovat ions have been carried out and he has no grievance in this regard. Under the circumstances, we see no useful purpose being served if we continue fu rther with this matter. Accordingly, this taken up matter is closed. However, liberty is granted to the parties concerned to approach the appropriate forum, if so advised, for redressal of their grievances, if any.