Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 29 November, 2024
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/41
GAHC010239582024
2024:GAU-AS:11948
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5993/2024
FARIDA KHANOM
D/O- AHMED KHAN,
R/O- BORBORI,
P.O- AMD P.S- LAHARIGHAT,
PIN-782127, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, ASSAM,
GUWAHATI- 781006
2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
MORIGAON
ASSAM
3:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
P.O. AND P.S. MORIGAON
DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 782105
4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD
P.O. AND P.S. MORIGAON
DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 782105
Page No.# 2/41
5:THE MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT
REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
P.O. MOIRABARI
P.S. MORIGAON
DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 78212
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K MUNIR, MR. A. GAYAN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., GA, ASSAM
Linked Case : WP(C)/5601/2024
MD. MARUF SADDAM HUSSAIN
SON OF TAMIR UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- TATIKOTA
POST-OFFICE- MOIRABARI
POLICE STATION- MOIRABARI
DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
2:THE COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSAM
JURIPAR
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI-37
ASSAM
3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
MORIGAON
MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 782105
4:ZILLA PARISHAD
Page No.# 3/41
MORIGAON
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
5:MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT
REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER
6:SELIM CHOUDHURY
S/O- MUJJAMEL HUSSAIN
R/O- MOIRABARI
P.O. AND P.S. MOIRABARI
DIST.- MORIGAON
ASSAM
PIN- 782126
------------
Advocate for : MR S BORTHAKUR Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/4313/2024 GAUTOM MEDHI S/O DHANESWAR MEDHI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HAHCHARA PO BHURBANDHA PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782104 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED bY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM 781006 2:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO AND PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD PO AND PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 Page No.# 4/41 4:THE BHURBANDHA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO BHURBANDHA PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 78205 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BHURBANDHA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT PO BHURBANDHA PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782104 6:SACHIN KUMAR BORA S/O PHULENDRA BORA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHAKABAHI PO KUMURAGURI PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASAM 782104
------------
Advocate for : MR. M K HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/4311/2024 APURBA KR NATH S/O LTAE BHUBAN CH. NATH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HABIBARANGABARI PO HABIBARANGABARI PS MIKIRBHETA DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782106 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED Y THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM 781006 2:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD Page No.# 5/41 REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO AND PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD PO AND PS MORIGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 4:THE BHURBANDHA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO BHURBANDHA PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 78205 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BHURBANDHA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT PO BHURBANDHA PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782104 6:SUMANTA KUMAR NATH S/O LATE KHAGEN CH. NATH RESIDENT OF PARASUTANGUNI PO HABIBARANGABARI PS MIKIRBHETA DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782106
------------
Advocate for : MR. M K HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3663/2024 RAJ HUSSAIN S/O- LATE ALTAF HUSSAIN R/O- VILL.- PAIKAN PART-II P.O. AND P.S. KRISHNAI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783126.
Page No.# 6/41 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GHY-37.
3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOALPARA DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER GOALPARA ZILLA PARISHAD GOALPARA ASSAM 5:KRISHNAI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER KRISHNAI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. AND P.S. KRISHNAI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783126.
------------
Advocate for : MR H R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/5859/2024 BULBUL ISLAM SON OF IMAN ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MOIRABARI Page No.# 7/41 P.O.- MOIRABARI P.S.- MOIRABARI DISTRICT- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782126 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O. AND P.S. MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782005 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND P.S. MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782005 4:THE MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O. MOIRABARI P.S. MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782126 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. MOIRABARI P.S. MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782126 6:TASLIM MUKTAR SON OF LATE ABUL BASHAR MUKTAR Page No.# 8/41 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HATIMURIA P.O. MOIRABARI P.S. MOIRABARI DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782126
------------
Advocate for : MR. A M AHMED Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3632/2024 MD. ALIM UDDIN SON OF LATE RAMIJ UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KUPOTIMARI POST-OFFICE- BHURAGAON POLICE-STATION- BHURAGAON DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37 ASSAM 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MORIGAON MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782105 4:ZILLA PARISHAD MORIGAON REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Page No.# 9/41 5:LAHARIGHAT ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER
------------
Advocate for : MR S BORTHAKUR Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/4076/2024 SHAFIKUL ISLAM S/O- LATE ABDUL KADDUS VILLAGE- BANIARAPARA P.S- BARPETA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781314 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR ASSAM GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 ASSAM 3:THE BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 Page No.# 10/41 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE BARPETA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER DIST- BARPETA ASSAM 6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.S AND DIST- BARPETA ASSAM 7:KHANDAKAR ABDUL JALIL S/O- KHANDAKAR ABUL HUSSAIN VILLAGE-BANIARAPARA P.S- BARPETA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781314
------------
Advocate for : MR. A M AHMED Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/4481/2024 MD. AINUL HOQUE S/O MOFIZ UDDINR/O VILL- ROWMARI P.O. ROWMARI P.S. RUPAHIHAT DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782125 VERSUS Page No.# 11/41 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR ASSAM GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE NAGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O. AND P.S. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782001 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER NAGAON ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND P.S. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001 4:THE RUPAHIHAT ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O. RUPAHIHAT P.S. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782125 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER RUPAHIHAT ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT PO. RUPAHIHAT P.S. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAMPIN-782125 6:UTTAM KONWAR S/O BHUGESWAR KONWAR R/O VILL- UKHAHAPAR Page No.# 12/41 P.O. GOTONGA P.S. RUPAHIHAT DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782125
------------
Advocate for : MR. M K HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3613/2024 MD. ANSER ALI S/O- LATE MOMIN ALI VILL. AND P.O. KADANG P.S. KALGACHIA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.
2:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD BARPETA AND IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT MANDIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT MANDIA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM 3:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MANDIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT MANDIA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM 4:MONCHER ALI S/O- LATE MAMIN ALI VILL. AND P.O. KADONG P.S. AND DIST. BARPETA Page No.# 13/41 ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. R ALI Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/5858/2024 ABDUL JALIL SON OF LATE HARAN RASHID RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHAURIABHITHA P.S.- CHHAYGAON DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM.
PIN- 781136.
VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.
2:THE KAMRUP ZILLA PARISHAD AMINGAON REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AMINGAON DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781331.
3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KAMRUP ZILLA PARISHAD AMINGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM Page No.# 14/41 PIN- 781331.
4:THE GOROIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O.- GOROIMARI P.S- CHHAYGAON DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM.
5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER GOROIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. GOROIMARI P.S. CHHAYGAON DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM.
6:MD. SAYEDUR RAHMAN SON OF LATE SAGAR ALI VILLAGE- CHAMPUPARA GAON P.O.- CHAMPUPARA P.S.- CHHAYGAON DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781136.
7:MD. SURMAN ALI SON OF LATE MUNNAF ALI VILLAGE- CHAMPUPARA GAON P.O.- CHAMPUPARA P.S.- CHHAYGAON DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781136.
------------
Advocate for : MR. A M AHMED Advocate for : SC Page No.# 15/41 P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3649/2024 PADMA KANTA HAZARIKA AND ANR S/O LATE LAKHI KANTA HAZARIKA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND PO SALAGURI PS DHING DIST NAGAON ASSAM 2: SRI MUKUL HUSSAIN S/O LATE SAMAR ALI RESIDENT OF HAIDUBI PO BATAMARI DIST NAGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE NAGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REPRSENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO AND DIST NAGAON ASSAM 782001 3:THE BATADRAVA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO DHING DIST NAGAON ASSAM 782122
------------
Advocate for : MR. D A KAIYUM Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/3615/2024 KADAM ALI S/O- LATE ABDUL MAZID Page No.# 16/41 VILLAGE- MOURIGAON P.S- BAGHBAR DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781308 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI- 781037 3:THE BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA BARPETA PIN- 781301 ASSAM 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 5:THE MANDIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER DISTRICT- BARPETA (ASSAM) PIN- 781308.
6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MANDIA ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O.- MANDIA P.S.- BAGHBAR DISTRICT- BARPETA (ASSAM) PIN- 781308.
Page No.# 17/41
------------
Advocate for : P. GHOSH Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/4824/2024 PUNYA KUMAR PATAR S/O LATE DHARANI PATAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BORBORI PO PUKARKATA PS BHURAGAON DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782121 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. DISPUR GWUAHATI ASSAM 06 2:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO AND PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD PO AND PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 4:THE LAHARIGHAT ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO LAHARIGHAT PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782127 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER LAHARIGHAT ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT PO LAHARIGHAT PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782127 Page No.# 18/41 6:GAUTAM PATAR S.O LATE DURGESWAR PATAR VILLAGE BATABORI PO CHATIANTOLI PS LAHARIGHAT DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782127
------------
Advocate for : MR. M K HUSSAIN Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/5745/2024 MOHANTA DEWRI S/O GORSING DEWRI R/O TEGHERIA GAON P.S. JAGIROAD P.O. KAJAJ NAGAR DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782413 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PANJABARI GHY- 781037 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PRISHAD MORIGAON ASSAM-782105.
Page No.# 19/41 4:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MAYANG ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT JAGI BHAKATGAON MORIGAON ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. M K BORO Advocate for : SC P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/5724/2024 MD. JAKIR HUSSAIN S/O- LATE MOKBUL HUSSAIN R/O- VILLAGE DATIALBORI P.O- DATIALBORI DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.
2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MORIGAON ASSAM 3:THE MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PO AND PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD PO AND PS AND DIST MORIGAON ASSAM 782105 Page No.# 20/41 5:THE MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT MOIRABARI REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER P.O.-MOIRABARI DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM 6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF MOIRABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT MOIRABARI P.O.-MOIRABARI DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM 7:MD. RAHUL AMIN S/O- ABDUL SAMAD VILL- BORBARI P.O- LAHARIGAT DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782127
-----------
Advocates for the petitioner(s) : Mr. PK Munir Mr. AM Ahmed Mr. FU Borbhuiya Mr. MK Boro Mr. R Ali Mr. B Rahman Mr. S Borthakur Mr. DA Kaiyum Mr. MK Hussain Advocates for the respondent(s): Mr. K Konwar Additional Advocate General, Assam. Mr. AK Ghose Mr. S Dutta Standing Counsel, P & RD Page No.# 21/41 Department, Govt. of Assam Mr. MU Mahmud Date of hearing : 19.11.2024 Date of Judgment : 29.11.2024 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH JUDGMENT & ORDER(CAV) Heard Mr. PK Munir, Mr. AM Ahmed, Mr. FU Borbhuiya, Mr. MK Boro, Mr. R Ali, Mr. B Rahman, Mr. S Borthakur, Mr. DA Kaiyum, Mr. MK Hussain, the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners in the present batch of writ petitions. Also heard Mr. K Konwar, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, who is also the Standing Counsel of the P& RD Department, Government of Assam. In addition to that, on behalf of the P & RD Department, Mr. S Dutta appears. Mr. AK Ghose, Mr. A Sarma and Mr. MU Mahmud, the learned counsels appear on behalf of the private respondents in the batch of writ petitions.
2. The instant batch of writ petitions were filed challenging the Notification dated 29.06.2024 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, P & RD Department whereby the process of settlement of Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc. for the year 2024-25 for which various Notice Inviting Tenders were floated were cancelled on the basis of a decision of the Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024. In addition to that, in some of the writ petitions, the Page No.# 22/41 Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 had also been assailed. The petitioners herein who have been intimated that they are the highest bidders have also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to bring the tender process to a logical conclusion by allowing them to run the settlements.
3. For deciding the dispute(s) involved in the batch of writ petitions, this Court would like to deal with the facts which led to the filing of the batch of writ petitions.
4. The materials on record reveal that the various Anchalik Panchayats under the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (for short, the Act of 1994) had issued NITs for settlement of Haats, Ghats, Ferries, Fisheries etc. in the month of May, 2024. Pursuant to the NITs, the petitioners herein along with various other bidders participated in the said bid process and were informed respectively that their bids were accepted and thereby asking the petitioners to do the needful in terms with Rule 47(11) of the Assam Panchayat (Financial) Rules, 2002 ( for short, the Rules of 2002). While the said process was on going, a Notification was issued on 29.06.2024 by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, P & RD Department informing all the concerned that pursuant to a Cabinet decision held on 27.06.2024, the Governor of Assam had cancelled the ongoing process for settlement of Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc., for the year 2024-25 for which the NITs were already floated. In the said Notification, it was also mentioned that until new tenders are floated and finalized, the existing lessees may be given extensions at the settlement value fixed for the year 2023-
24. The reasons for cancellation was also spelt out in the impugned Notification Page No.# 23/41 wherein it was mentioned that the decision was taken by the Cabinet on the basis of certain complaints being received at various levels that the small traders, vendors and other sellers in the Haats and Bazaars etc. were often exploited by the bidders who quote exorbitantly high bid prices to grab the lease, and, as such, the Governor of Assam was pleased to make provisions that no settlement shall be made with the bidders who quote more than 10% of the average settled value of the last 3(three) years of these Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc. It was also mentioned that the new NITs would be issued which will include these conditions and would be floated for settlement of the Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc., for the year 2024-25.
5. On the basis of the impugned Notification, various office orders were issued by the Zilla Parishads thereby cancelling the entire tender process. Being aggrieved, the instant batch of writ petitions have been filed seeking the relief as above mentioned.
6. The State of Assam had filed the affidavit-in-opposition justifying the impugned Notification, the details of which, this Court would refer while taking note of the submissions of the learned counsels.
7. In the backdrop of the above facts, let this Court now take note of the submissions made on behalf of the parties.
8. Mr. S Borthakur, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of some of the writ petitioners submitted that Section 105 of the Act of 1994 stipulates how Page No.# 24/41 settlement of Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc., are to be made by the Anchalik Panchayat. Referring to Sub-Section (2) of Section 105, the learned counsel submitted that the detailed procedure for settling of Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc., by way of tender has been specifically prescribed in Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002. The learned counsel further referred to Section 105 of the Act of 1994 which stipulates that re-settlement shall be made subject to the confirmation of the Zilla Parishad and in respect to the writ petitioners for whom he represents the Zilla Parishad had confirmed such settlement. The learned counsel further referred to Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002 and, more particularly submitted that the interference in the said tender process by the Government would only be permissible when a case comes within the ambit of Section 105(4) of the Act of 1994 or in a case coming within the ambit of Sub-Rules (9), (10), and (12) of Rule 47(9) of the Rules of 2002.
9. The learned counsel further referred to the provisions of the Constitution of India and, more particularly Article 243G and 243H which stipulates that the powers, authorities and responsibilities of the panchayat as well as the powers to impose taxes by the panchayats have been already stipulated under the Act of 1994. He submitted that Constitution (Seventy Third) Amendment Act, 1992 was enacted thereby inserting Part IX to the Constitution of India so that the panchayats are empowered and enabled to function as institutions of Self- Governance. The learned counsel, therefore, submitted that in view of the mandate of the Act of 1994 as well as the Rules framed therein under read with the Constitutional provisions as contained in Part IX of the Constitution, interference of the State Government is minimal, else it would make the amendment to the Constitution nugatory. He, therefore, submitted that when Page No.# 25/41 this Court is dealing with the instant proceedings, this Court has to keep in mind the said aspect while interpreting the provisions of the Act of 1994.
10. Mr. S Borthakur, the learned counsel further submitted that if the interpretation is not made in such a manner, it would result in undue interference by the State Government in all matters, resultantly, the object behind the amendment of the Constitution about decentralization of power and permitting the Panchayats to function as institutions of Self Governance would become nugatory. The learned counsel referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Case of the State of Maharashtra Vs. Reliance Industries Limited reported in (2017) 10 SCC 713, and more particularly, referred to paragraph 27.
11. The learned counsel Mr. Borthakur further submitted that the impugned Notification whereby the earlier leasee was permitted to continue is completely contrary to Sections 105 and Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002.
12. Mr. FU Borbhuiya, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of some of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners for whom he represents have not only challenged the Notification dated 29.06.2024, but also have challenged the Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024. He submitted that the Cabinet decision which was made would result in arbitrariness and unreasonableness, inasmuch as, when all bidders quote the maximum permissible viable rate, it would result in pick and choose policy.
Page No.# 26/41
13. Mr. PK Munir, Mr. AM Ahmed, Mr. MK Boro, Mr. R Ali, Mr. B Rahman, Mr. DA Kaiyum and Mr. MK Hussain have also made similar submissions. But for the sake of brevity, this Court is not repeating the same.
14. Per contra, Mr. K. Konwar, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam submitted that the petitioners had no right to challenge the Notification dated 29.06.2024, inasmuch as, no rights had accrued upon them on the basis of being informed about the acceptance of their bids. He submitted that in addition to the acceptance of the bids there are other formalities which are required to be performed and in absence thereof, there is no concluded contract. In addition to that, he submitted that merely being the highest bidder would not confer any right to get a settlement.
15. The learned Additional Advocate General, Assam further submitted that the State of Assam keeping in tune with the Directive Principles of the State Policy and, more particularly, Articles 38 and 39 had made a State Policy for the benefit of the common people, thereby to insert a viable range within which the tenders would be accepted. He submitted that this State Policy had to be made taking into account that the small traders, vendors and other sellers in the Haats, Bazaars etc. are often exploited by the bidders, who quote exorbitantly high bid price to grab the lease. Further to that, in order to confer benefit upon the common people by bringing down the price of the commodities being traded, it has become a necessity that a viable range had to be incorporated in the tender documents. On that basis a decision was taken by the Cabinet on 27.06.2024. The said Cabinet decision was then notified by the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 whereby the ongoing process of settlement of the Page No.# 27/41 Haats, Ghats, Fisheries, Pounds etc. for the year 2024-25 was cancelled.
16. Mr. K. Konwar, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam further submitted that the power so exercised is in terms with Section 122(1) of the Act of 1994, whereby the State had been empowered to issue directions to any Panchayat in matters relating to State and National Policies and such directions were binding upon the Panchayat. He, therefore, submitted that it now being a policy decision of the State to have a viable range in order to protect the exploitation of the small traders, vendors and other sellers the State had the power to issue such directions.
17. The learned Additional Advocate General, Assam further submitted with all fairness that in view of the settled position of law, he would not contest the aspect pertaining to the extension granted to the old lessees at their existing rate till fresh tenders were not floated. He submitted that pursuant to the stay orders passed, the Anchalik Panchayats are presently running the markets in question.
18. Replying to the submissions made by Mr. K Konwar, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, Mr. S Borthakur, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the interpretation so sought to be given by the State Government to Section 122 of the Act of 1994 would amount to undue interference in all matters of the Panchayats by the State Government inspite of the fact that by way of legislation, the powers of the State Government have already endowed upon the Panchayats. He, therefore, submitted that the Page No.# 28/41 manner in which the respondent State had taken the decision by issuing the Notification dated 29.06.2024 was not in accordance with law and, accordingly, liable to be interfered with. He further submitted that the respondents be further directed to bring the said tender proceedings to a logical conclusion as per the mandates of Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002.
19. Upon hearing the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the materials on record, the following points for determination arise for consideration:
(i). Whether the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification issued on 29.06.2024 are contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1994 as well as the constitutional mandate in Part IX of the Constitution?
(ii). Whether the rights of the petitioners have been affected on the basis of the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024?
20. Part IX of the Constitution of India was inserted by the Constitution (Seventy Third) Amendment Act 1992. The said amendment was brought to give effect to one of the Directive Principles of the State Policy (DPSP), namely Article 40 of the Constitution, whereby the State is required to take steps to organise village Panchayats and endow upon them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self government. The instant proceedings relate primarily to the devolution of the powers of the State upon the Panchayats as mandated in Article 243G and Article 243H of the Constitution of India. Under such circumstances, it is Page No.# 29/41 necessary to deal with the said Articles of the Constitution. Article 243 G of the Constitution is reproduced hereinunder:
'243G. Powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats. - Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, endow the Panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-government and such law may contain provisions for the devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Panchayats at the appropriate level, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with respect to-
(a) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice;
(b) the implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule'.
21. A perusal of the above-quoted Article 243 G shows that the legislature of the State may, by law, endow the Panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self government and such law may contain, provisions for devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Panchayats at appropriate level subject to such conditions as may be specified therein. The conditions have been enumerated in Sub- Articles (a) and (b) of Article 243G of the Constitution. The conditions relate to preparation of plans for economic development and social justice as well as to implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them, including those in relation to matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule. A further reading of Article 243 G read with the Eleventh Schedule to the Constitution would show that it is not a source of legislative power and it is only an enabling provision that empowers the State to endow functions and devolve powers and responsibilities to Panchayats by enacting Page No.# 30/41 relevant law. Article 243 H of the Constitution is reproduced hereinunder:
'243H. Powers to impose taxes by, and Funds of, the Panchayats.- The Legislature of a State may, by law,-
(a) authorise a Panchayat to levy, collect and appropriate such taxes, duties, tolls and fees in accordance with such procedure and subject to such limits;
(b) assign to a Panchayat such taxes, duties, tolls and fees levied and collected by the State Government for such purposes and subject to such conditions and limits;
(c) provide for making such grants-in-aid to the Panchayats from the Consolidated Fund of the State; and
(d) provide for constitution of such Funds for crediting all moneys received, respectively, by or on behalf of the Panchayats and also for the withdrawal of such moneys therefrom, as may be specified in the law.'
22. A perusal of the above-quoted Article mandates that the legislative of the State may, by law, authorize a Panchayat to levy, collect and appropriate such taxes, duties, tolls and fees in accordance with such procedure and subject to such limits; Further, the Legislature of the State may, by law, assign to the Panchayats such taxes, duties, tolls and fees levied and collected by the State Government for such purposes and subject to such conditions and limits. In addition to that, the Legislature of the State, may, by law, provide for making such grants-in-aid to the Panchayats from the Consolidated Fund of the State as well as provide for constitution of such Funds for crediting all moneys received, respectively, by or on behalf of the Panchayats and also for the withdrawal of such moneys therefrom. Therefore, it would be seen that the power to be exercised by the Panchayats is subject to the law made by the Legislature. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention that in the instant batch of writ petitions, there is no challenge to the law made by the Legislature. However, from the contentions of the parties, one can discern that the contentions of the Page No.# 31/41 petitioners is that Section 122 of the Act of 1994 should be read with the Constitutional Scheme as envisaged in Part IX of the Constitution.
23. Pursuant to the amendment made to the Constitution whereby Part IX was inserted with effect from 24.04.1993, the Act of 1994 was enacted. The powers conferred upon the Anchalik Panchayat to settle Haats can be traced to Section 105 of the Act of 1994. Section 105 of the Act of 1994 is reproduced hereinunder:
"105. Settlement of Hats by Anchalik Panchayat.
(1)All Hats within the territorial jurisdiction of Anchalik Panchayat shall be settled in the manner prescribed for a period coinciding with and not exceeding one Panchayat financial year by inviting tenders at the office of the Anchalik Panchayat by its President.
(2)Detailed procedure for inviting and submission of such tenders shall be such as may be prescribed.
(3)The powers of examination and final acceptance of such tenders shall be vested in the Standing Committee referred to in Section 52 (1) (a).
(4)All settlement made under sub-section (3) shall be subject to the confirmation of the Zilla Parishad;
Provided that in case of any dispute, the Anchalik Panchayat may refer such case to the Government and the aggrieved party may appeal to Government whose decision in this regard shall be final.
(5) Failure to settle any Hat for want of adequate value, the Anchalik Panchayat, as may by decided by the Zilla Parishad, may be entrusted with the direct management of such Hat by the Anchalik Panchayat.
(6) All sale proceeds of hats shall be deposited in the Anchalik Panchayat fund and distributed in the manner hereinafter prescribed:
(a)an amounts equivalent to twenty percent of the total sale proceeds of Hats, Page No.# 32/41 shall be made over to the Zilla Parishad funds, and
(b)an amount equivalent to forty percent of the sale proceeds of Hats shall be equally distributed to all the Gaon Panchayats under the Anchalik Panchayat and remaining forty percent retained in the Anchalik Panchayat Fund:
Provided that amount due if any, on account of annual installment for repayment of the loan with interest incurred by the erstwhile Mahkuma Parishad, Anchalik Panchayat and Gaon Panchayat for improvement of hats falling within the jurisdiction of the Ancahalik Panchayat and Gaon Panchayat concerned shall be paid out of the forty percent share of sale proceeds of hats made over to Anchalik Panchayat or Gaon Panchayat as the case may be."
24. A perusal of the above-quoted Section 105 of the Act of 1994 would reveal that settlement of the Haats within the territorial jurisdiction of an Anchalik Panchayat shall be settled in the manner prescribed for a period coinciding with and not exceeding one Panchayat financial year, by inviting tenders at the Office of the Anchalik Panchayat by its President. Therefore, in terms with Sub-Section (1) of Section 105, it is clear that the settlement can be made for a period of only one Panchayat financial year, that too, by inviting tenders. Sub-Section (2) of Section 105 stipulates about the detailed procedure for invitation and submission of such tenders and in the manner to be prescribed. Sub-Section (4) of Section 105 stipulates that all settlements made under Sub-Section (3) shall be subject to confirmation of the Zilla Parishads. Sub-Section (5) of Section 105 stipulates that if there is a failure to settle any Haats for want of adequate value, the Anchalik Panchayats, as may be decided by the Zilla Parishad, may be entrusted with the direct management of such Haat by the Anchalik Panchayat.
25. The prescription as mentioned in Sub-Section (1) and (2) of Section 105 of Page No.# 33/41 the Act of 1994 can be traced to Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002. At this stage, it is very pertinent to take note of Rule 47(2) of the Rules of 2002 which stipulates that the tender notice is required to be floated at least 45 days before the last date of the Panchayat financial year and such tender notice shall state, amongst others, the conditions for submission of tenders, including the amount of security money for the purpose. This aspect is seen from sub-clause (ii) of Rule 47(2) of the Rules of 2002. Sub-Rule (10) of Rule 47 stipulates that a tender of the highest bidder shall be accepted and in a circumstance, where the highest bidder is not accepted, the government's prior and formal approval is required.
Sub- Rules (11), (12) and (13) of Rule 47 being relevant are reproduced hereinunder:
"Rule 47.................. (11) On acceptance of the tender, the Panchayat concerned shall inform the selected tenderers concerned requiring the tenderers to submit within seven days from the date of issuing the acceptance letter to-
(i) Deposit with the Panchayat concerned not less than thirty percent of his quoted amount in his tender as security. The amount of security shall be recorded in the Register in FORM No.12 and accept a duty stamped lease in a Form as specified in Annexure-8 of the Schedule of these rules.
(ii) The Panchayat concerned shall provide the Form of lease and stamps papers at the concerned lessee's cost (12) If the tenderer referred to in sub-clauses (ii) fails either to deposit the required amount or to accept the lease within the stipulated period of seven days, the Panchayat concerned shall refer the matter to the Government whose decision in this regard, shall be final:
Provided that the lease shall not be issued before deposit of the required amount by the tenderer as reffered to in sub-clause (i) of clause(11).
(13) Failure of the tenderer to comply with the condition set forth in sub-
Page No.# 34/41 clause (11) (i), (ii) shall result in forfeiture of his earnest money deposited in concerned Panchayat's Fund."
26. A perusal of the above quoted Sub-Rules would show that once the tender is accepted, the Panchayat concerned shall inform the selected tenderer requiring the tenderer within 7(seven) days from the date of issue of the acceptance letter, to deposit with the Panchayat concerned not less than 30% of the quoted amount in the tender as security and accept a duly stamped lease in a form as specified in Annexure- 8 of the Schedule of the Rules. In addition to that, the Panchayat concerned shall provide the form of lease and stamp paper at the concerned lessee's cost. Sub-Rule (12) mandates that if the tenderer fails either to deposit the required amount or accept the lease within the stipulated period of seven days, the Panchayat concerned shall refer the matter to the government, whose decision in this regard shall be final. Sub-Rule (13) categorically mentions that if there is a failure on the part of the tenderer to comply with the conditions set forth in Sub-clause (i) and (ii) of Rule (11), the tenderer shall forfeit the earnest money deposited in the concerned Panchayat fund. These Sub-Rules (11), (12) and (13) of the Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002 as quoted above, is of vital relevance for the adjudication of the instant dispute, inasmuch as, there is no formal settlement without the compliance to Sub-Rule Clause (i) and (ii) of Rule 47(11) of the Rules of 2002.
27. Coming back to the Act of 1994, it is further relevant to take note of Section 122 of the Act of 1994. The said Section being important for the purpose of the instant dispute is reproduced hereinunder:
"122. Direction from Government.
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, it shall be lawful for the Page No.# 35/41 Government to issue directions to any Panchayat in matters relating to State and national policies and such directions shall be binding on the Panchayat.
(2)The Government may
(a)call for any record or register or other document in possession or under the control of any Panchayat;
(b)require any Panchayat to furnish return, plan, estimate, statement, accounts or statistics; and
(c) require any Panchayat to furnish any information or report on any matter connected with such Panchayat."
28. A perusal of the Sub-Section (1) of Section 122 shows that it starts with a non-obstante clause thereby empowering the Government of Assam to issue directions to any Panchayat in matters relating to State and National policies and such directions shall be binding on the Panchayats. Further to that in terms with Sub-Section (2) of Section 122 of the Act of 1994, the Government may call for any record or register or other documents in possession or under the control of any Panchayat; require any Panchayat to furnish return, plan, estimate, statement, accounts or statistics; and require any Panchayat to furnish any information or report on any power connected with such Panchayats. The non-obstante Clause contained in Section 122, thereby overriding the other provisions of the Act of 1994 shows that the Government has pervasive control over the working of the Panchayats. In addition to that the Government also exercise supervisory jurisdiction in respect to settlement to be made by law upon the Government is not the subject matter of challenge.
29. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of Article 38 of the Page No.# 36/41 Constitution of India. There are two Sub-Articles in the said Article. In terms of Sub-Article (1) of Article 38, the State is required to strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may, a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all institutions of the National life. Sub-Article (2) of Article 38 mandates that the State, in particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income and endeavor to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities not only amongst individuals, but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations. The reference to Article 38 has been made taking into account that it is the submission of the Additional Advocate General that keeping in tune with the said Article, the Cabinet decision was taken which resulted in the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024.
30. On the edifice of the above provisions, let this Court now take up the Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024. The Cabinet decision was taken to ensure fair prices for markets and bazaar. This decision was taken in view of concerns received from various quarters on account of high bidding which results in settlement of markets, Public Bazaars, Haats, Ghats, etc., at exorbitant prices and in order to make payment of the bid amount, the bidders collect the same from the traders, vendors and sellers of the concerned markets. Consequently, the prices of the goods traded in these markets are also high which affects the general public. The State of Assam which is a welfare State for the benefit of the common people had taken the Cabinet decision to have a viable rate in the bids.
31. It is further apparent from the submissions made by the learned Additional Page No.# 37/41 Advocate General as well as the contents of affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent State that on account of bidding high prices for settlement of markets, Public Bazaars, Haats, Ghats, etc., the small traders, vendors and other sellers in the Haats and Bazaars etc., are exploited by the lessees in order to recuperate the high bid price at which settlements have been made. It further transpires that in view of such higher amount being charged from small traders, vendors and other sellers in the Haats and Bazaars, it affects on the price of the goods traded by these small traders, vendors and other sellers and, consequently, it affects the prices of the goods which are traded and thereby increase in prices of the commodities. In order to curb these menace, the Cabinet decision was taken on 27.06.2024. In the opinion of this Court the Cabinet decision is in tune with Article 38 of the Constitution of India. This Government decision which was taken on 27.06.2024 was duly notified by the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024, whereby it was duly notified that a viable range, which would be up to 10% of the average settled value of the last three years, would be incorporated in the tender conditions and as such, the Governor of Assam have cancelled the ongoing tender process.
32. In the opinion of this Court, this part of the Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024, nor the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 can be said to be in conflict with any provisions of law. Section 122 of the Act of 1994, as observed above, empowers the State to pass directions in relation to National policies as well as the State policies. The Cabinet decision amounts to a State Policy based upon the DPSP. The impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 is the policy decision which gives effect to the State Policy.
Page No.# 38/41
33. At this stage, if this Court duly takes note of the submission of the learned counsels for the petitioners to the effect that that such interference so made by exercising powers under Section 122 of the Act of 1994 by the State Government would amount to rendering the Part IX of the Constitution nugatory, in the opinion of this Court is misconceived for two reasons: First, the powers conferred upon the Panchayats under Article 243G and 243H is subject to the law made by the Legislature of the State. The law made by the Legislature of the State includes the provisions of Section 122 (1) which confers supervisory powers to the Government over the Panchayats. Section 122(1) has not been put to challenge; Secondly, Section 122(1) confers power upon the State Government to issue directions upon the Panchayats in connection with National policies as well as State policies which are binding upon the Panchayats. The decision so taken in the Cabinet keeping in tune with Article 38 of the Constitution being a State policy and therefore, it cannot be said that such exercise of the powers by the State would amount to rendering Part IX of the Constitution nugatory. In that view of the matter, the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 insofar as cancellation of the tender process as well as inserting a viable rate do not call for any interference.
34. Be that as it may, a question arises as to whether the second part of the Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 and the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 to grant extensions to the existing lessee at the same rate as settled for the financial year 2023-24 was contrary to the provisions of Section 105(5) as well as Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002. It is a well settled principle of law that when the Statute mandates a thing to be done in a particular way, the same has Page No.# 39/41 to be done in that manner or not at all. Section 105(1) of the Act of 1994 categorically mandates that the lease would be granted for one Panchayat Financial year. In addition to that, it is also seen from Section 105(5) of the Act of 1994 that in the circumstance that the settlement cannot be made, then the said Haat, Markets, Bazaar etc., is required to be run by the Anchalik Panchayat upon such decision of the Zilla Parishad. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the Cabinet decision and the impugned Notification cannot run contrary to the provisions of Section 105 of the Act of 1994. Furthermore, the granting of extension is totally foreign to the provisions of the Act of 1994.
35. In view of the above analysis, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 insofar as, the cancellation of the tender process is concerned for the year 2024-25 and to incorporate the viable rate do not call for any interference. However, as regards the aspect pertaining to extension to be granted to the existing lessees at the same rate as in the year 2023-24 as contained in the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 and the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 is interfered with.
36. Now let this Court take up the Second point for determination as to whether the impugned Cabinet decision as well as the impugned Notification have affected any rights of the petitioners. In the foregoing paragraphs of the instant judgment, this Court had duly taken note of the provisions of Rules 11 to 13 of Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002. It is seen from a perusal of the said Rules that a right would be created when there is a concluded contract. The concluded contract would only arise when there is a formal lease entered Page No.# 40/41 into. It is very pertinent at this stage to mention that on 27.06.2024, the Cabinet decision was taken and the same was duly informed to all Panchayats vide the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024. As admittedly in all the writ petitions, there was no creation of rights by execution of a lease prior to 29.06.2024, no right had accrued upon the petitioners on the basis of being intimated that their tenders were accepted being the highest bidder. It is further relevant to mention here that if any lease entered into by the concerned Panchayats after 29.06.2024 in favour of any of the petitioners or any bidders after the cancellation of the tender process by the Governor, the same would be nonest as it would be contrary to the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 and the mandates of Sections 122(1) of the Act of 1994.
37. Accordingly the instant batch of writ petitions are disposed of with the following observation(s) and direction(s):
(i). The impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 calls for no interference, in so far as cancellation of the tender process for the period of 2024-25 and the decision to incorporate a viable rate in the tenders.
(ii). The impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 in so far as granting of extension to the existing lessee till new tenders are not issued runs counter to Section 105 of the Act of 1994 as well as Rule 47 of the Rules of 2002 and, as such, the impugned Cabinet decision dated 27.06.2024 as well as the impugned Notification dated 29.06.2024 to that extent are interfered with.
(iii). The respondent authorities are directed to run the Haats in question till Page No.# 41/41 finalization of fresh tenders under the direct management of the concerned Anchalik Panchayat.
(iv). The respondent authorities are directed to complete the fresh tender process upon finalization of the modalities at the earliest and preferably within three months from the date of the instant judgment.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant