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