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.# 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

Order downloaded on 04-08-2025 10:06:25 PMPage 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