The Gauhati High Court has said that the demolition of residents' homes on private land in Goalpara did not "prima-facie" show any imminent threat requiring such action and further prima facie pointed to misuse of the Disaster Management Department Act.

The court was hearing a petition moved by various persons challenging notice issued by Circle Office, Matia (Respondent No. 3) "threatening" the petitioners that if the dwelling houses constructed on their own agricultural lands are not demolished within 24 hours, legal action would be taken against the Petitioners under Rule 6 of the Settlement Rules framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 read with Sections 30(2)(v) and 34(k) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

Previously the court had sought response of the State as to what was the "imminent danger" requiring the demolition of the petitioners' dwelling houses.

In its September 11 order, Justice Devashis Baruah noted that certain instructions had been submitted by the State's counsel; however the instructions, "prima facie do not show that there was a case of imminent danger for taking such drastic actions of demolishing houses on private lands". 

"Rather, it also prima facie appears to be a misuse of the Disaster Management Department Act, 2005," the court said.

The court took the instructions, i.e. the enquiry report dated 20.06.2026; order of the District Commissioner dated 23.06.2026 as well as the para-wise comments dated 09.09.2026 on its record.  

It thereafter granted an opportunity to the District Commissioner as well as the Circle Officer to file independent affidavits in the present proceedings. Additionally the court took note of the additional affidavit filed by the Petitioners wherein photographs of the demolition carried out as well as the losses suffered by the Petitioners were brought on record.

The court asked the State to respond to the petitioners' additional affidavit noting that it would also adjudicate on the question of compensation in the circumstance the Court holds that the action taken by the Respondents, more particularly the District Commissioner as well as the Circle Officer, were not authorized by law.

The matter is listed on October 13 and the court continued the operation of the interim order wherein it had directed that no further action will be taken by the authorities on the lands of the petitioners. 

Case Title: Jahidul Islam & 20 Ors. v. The State of Assam & 2 Ors.

Case No.: WP(C)/4903/2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order