Dated 27-08-2007

Name of the Complainant:
Sri Kurban Ali Khan
S/o. Gazi Rahman Khan, Gabindapur,
P.O. Sitoli & Dist Barpeta

Name of the Public Authority:
D.C. Barpeta

The following were present:
1. Sri R.L. Duarah D.C. Barpeta
2. Shri P.K. Paul ADC & SPIO, Barpeta
3. Kurban Ali Khan

The appellant present. The Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta, the Additional Deputy Commissioner & SPIO present.

Brief of the case
This is an appeal under section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005 from Kurban Ali Khan received by the Commission on 22.6.07 in which the appellant moved the Commission to review the order of the First Appellate Authority i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta dated 18.6.07 as documents were not furnished properly and the data furnished to him were not correct and the information was wrong and manipulated.

It was found from the records that on 11.5.07 the petitioner submitted a petition before the SPIO of the DC's office Barpeta in which he wanted the following information:

1. Whether any application was submitted by the 18 Nos. of pattadars in Gobindapur village in patta Nos. 127, 195, 20, 95, 339, 57, 81 and 331 covered by dag nos. 352, 372, 373, 380, 348, 478, 476, 423, 471, 469, 461, 369 and 361 and what action was taken on the application?
2. Whether there was any threatening to these pattadars?
3. Whether some encroachers encroached the land of the pattadars by way of constructing dwelling houses etc and whether any action was taken against the encroachers?
4. Whether any action was taken by the administration for protecting the life of the pattadars?
5. What action was taken on the petition of the pattadars in the office of the D.C. Barpeta?
6. Whether any forgery was made on the land documents in 5 no. sheet of Satrakarnar village?
7. When would be the land handed over to the real pattadars?

Submission of the parties:
The appellant submitted that he along with other pattadars wanted actual demarcation of their land and eviction of the encroachers from their lands. He further submitted that he received information from the SPIO of D.C. office to the quarries made by him in his petition dated 11.5.07, but he was satisfied with the information. He approached the 1st Appellate

Authority i.e. the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta, who however, rejected his petition. Hence he approached the Commission with this appeal petition.

The D.C. Barpeta who is the 1st Appellate Authority submitted before the Commission that he perused the records of the case thoroughly and found that Khan submitted petition before the SPIO on 11.5.07 seeking information on demarcation of the 18 number of pattadars. He found that the information was furnished by the SPIO within the stipulated timeframe as per section 7 of the RTI Act He further made it clear in his order that the appellant might submit application in proper format for demarcation of land under the provision of Revenue Acts and Rules in force in the appropriate Court of Revenue Law.

The SPIO of the D.C's Office, Barpeta stated that there was no delay on his part and the information as sought for by the appellant was furnished point by point. He further submitted before the Commission that the lands of the pattadars were demarcated by the land record staff and it was found that some encroachers had encroached upon some lands of the pattadars. But the Revenue authority would not in a position to evict the encroachers as the lands were covered by the periodic and annual pattas and it was not government land, He clarified that only in the case of Government land, Revenue authorities can evict the encroachers but in the case of patta land the pattadars had to approach the Civil Court for declaring their titles and possession over their land.

He however stated that as per the reports of the Circle Officer, Bhagbar Revenue Circle some of the Dag nos. as quoted by the appellant in his first petition dated 11.5.07 were not correct and the Circle Officer submitted detailed report giving the correct Dag nos. of these 18 pattadars.

Observation of the Commission
The Commissioner observed that basically the appellant wanted eviction of the encroachers from their patta lands. From the records as produced by the D.C. Barpeta it was found that information sought for by the appellant had already been furnished to him point wise and there was no point uncovered.

In respect of the question of eviction of the encroachers and handing over possession to the pattadars, the Commission observed that since it was purely a dispute between private parties, the D.C. Barpeta had no jurisdiction to entertain their petition for eviction of encroachers from their lands. It would be up to the pattadars to approach the Civil Court for redressal of their grievances if they wanted to do so.

The Commission found that both the SPIO and the-1st Appellate Authority (D.C. Barpeta) had acted very promptly in this case and had not violated any provision of the RTI Act. The Commission commended them on their prompt response in furnishing the information.

Decision of the Commission
The Commission on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case decided notto interfere with the orders of the 1st Appellate Authority dated 18.6.07.

The decision of the First Appellate Authority is upheld and the appeal rejected under section 19(8)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Sd/- (R.S. Mooshahary)
Chief Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.

Sd/- (Dr. B. K. Gohain)
State Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.


Authenticated true copy

(Jiauddin Ahmed)
Secretary, State Information Commission, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.

CC:
1. The Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta.
2. The ADC & SPIO, Barpeta.
3. Kurban Ali Khan, S/o. Gazi Rahman Khan, Vill Gobindapur, P.O. Sitoli Dist. Barpeta
4. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan.
5. The Director, Information & Public Relation, Dispur.
6. Office file.


Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam