Ram Labhaya, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of Civil Rules Nos. 11 and 12 of 1953.
(2.) MANIRUDDIN Ahmed is the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 11 of 1953. He has petitioned for relief under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. His case is that he is an assistant in the office of the Deputy Commissioner at Tezpur. He is a landless person. The Deputy Commissioner of Darrang requisitioned 2 Kathas and 13 Lechas of land in the Tezpur Town belonging to Messrs. Chunilal Dharamchand (Respondent No. 1) in order to provide him with accommodation. The land was requisitioned under Section 3 of the Assam Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act as amended by order dated 24 -4 -52. Respondent No. 1 whose land was requisitioned preferred an appeal to the Government of Assam which vacated the order requisitioning the land by their order of 12th September, 1952. In that order, it was observed that Maniruddin Ahmed was a tenant under Messrs. Chunilal Dharamchand for about 12 years and that a quarrel had arisen between them and therefore the land was requisitioned. It was found that there was no public purpose justifying the requisitioning of the land. In Civil Rule No. 12 of 1953, Bepin Chandra Chakravarty is the Petitioner. He has also invoked the jurisdiction of the Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution. His case is that he is a displaced person from East Pakistan. He is a legal practitioner who was forced to leave his home in East Pakistan with his family and migrated to the State of Assam. The Deputy Commissioner of Darrang by his order, dated 26 -5 -52 requisitioned 2 Kathas of land belonging to Messrs. Chunilal Dharamchand (Respondent No. 1) to provide accommodation for him under Section 3 of the Assam Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act. This order was appealed, from and the appeal was also disposed of by the same order by which the appeal against Maniruddin Ahmed was disposed of. The two appeals of Chunilal Dharamchand were heard together. It would appear from the order that the facts of the case of Bepin Chandra Chakravarty have not been stated in the order though the appeal against him has been disposed of by that very order.
(3.) IT is clear from the order that Maniruddin Ahmed and Bepin Chandra Chakravarty were represented when the appeals of Messrs. Chunilal Dharamchand, now Respondents were heard and disposed of.;