Udalguri: The Gauhati High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by 34 residents of Tangla challenging the cancellation of their temporary occupation licences by the Northeast Frontier Railway, clearing the way for eviction linked to the Amrit Bharat Station Scheme.
The petitioners had questioned a notice issued on January 18, 2024, by the Estate Officer, Rangia, directing them to vacate railway land within 30 days and dismantle their structures. They also sought a direction from the court to frame a rehabilitation plan in the event of their removal.
Hearing WP(C) No. 6092/2024, which was disposed of on February 5, 2026, Justice Kardak Ete observed that the occupants were holding the land under temporary commercial licences and not as residential settlers. The court noted that the agreements explicitly authorised the Railways to resume possession at any time by serving notice, requiring licensees to vacate within 30 days without claiming compensation.
The petitioners submitted that they and their predecessors had been running small businesses near Tangla Railway Station for nearly five to six decades. They contended that the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, had not been followed and argued that they were entitled to a show-cause notice prior to eviction. They also referred to matters pending before the Supreme Court concerning railway eviction drives in other parts of the country.
The High Court rejected the arguments, holding that the Public Premises Act was not applicable as the petitioners were not being treated as unauthorised occupants. Instead, their licences had been terminated in accordance with Clause 20 of the agreements, which the court said had been voluntarily accepted. The court further recorded that the land, acquired in 1913, indisputably belongs to the Railways and that the licences were temporary in nature, subject to annual renewal.
On the demand for rehabilitation, the court held that since the eviction was being carried out in line with contractual conditions and not through any unlawful action, there was no obligation on the authorities to provide alternative accommodation.
Taking note of a plea made by the petitioners’ counsel, the court directed the railway authorities to grant 30 days’ time to the occupants to vacate the land and remove their belongings and structures.