Guwahati: Gauhati high court has asked the Assam govt to consider increasing the strength of the district judiciary to ensure speedy disposal of land-grabbing cases before special tribunals.A division bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund, in an order dated Sept 25, noted that a PIL on land grabbing had remained pending since 2018 and that the mechanism under the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010, had produced “no tangible result” on the ground.The bench referred to a newspaper report citing a July 2018 report of the Commissioner of Police, Guwahati. According to the report, 969 land-grabbing cases had been reported at various police stations in Guwahati since the Act came into force. Of these, 853 cases had been registered and investigation was continuing in 439 cases as of July 18, 2018.The court noted that by Oct 9, 2018, none of the 969 cases had been referred to the special tribunal.Under Section 10(2) of the Act, the special tribunal must first determine civil liability and pass orders concerning title and ownership before deciding criminal liability.The bench observed that instead of augmenting the judicial strength of the special tribunals, the state govt had appointed district judges and additional district judges to man them, adding to the workload of the district judiciary.Referring to an earlier judgment dated Aug 17, 2017, the court said that although procedural issues had been addressed, “no tangible result” had been noticed on the ground. The prolonged process of determining both civil and criminal liability, it said, had hampered the expeditious disposal of land-grabbing cases.“The state govt has to consider as to whether it would be appropriate for the state govt to enhance the judicial strength of the district judiciary, so that there would be a pool of judicial officers who can be spared for manning the land grabbing tribunals for expeditious disposal of this category of cases. The state govt may also consider if more clarity can be brought in the Act or the Rules so that trial can be summary in nature as the Land Grabbing Tribunal does not decide title.”The bench said that if all 969 cases cited in the newspaper report were transferred to the Kamrup (Metro) district judiciary, it would be difficult for a single judicial officer, already burdened with other jurisdictions, to handle them.While making it clear that it could not issue a mandamus directing the govt to take such action, the court asked the state to consider increasing the strength of Grade-I judicial officers in areas reporting a high number of land-grabbing cases.It also asked the govt to examine whether the existing Act and rules required greater clarity on the nature of the trial.The PIL will come up for further hearing on Oct 5.
