Biju Saikia v. The State of Assam and 13 Ors

ORDER

06.02.2023 Heard Shri RP Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri D. Doley, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P & RD Department representing the respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 to 7 whereas Shri N. Goswami, learned State Counsel for the respondent no. 3 and Shri A. Gayan, learned counsel for the private respondent nos. 8 to 14.

¶2The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceeding of a meeting of No Confidence Motion against her in which the same was successfully passed removing her from the Page No.# 4/5 post of President of Uttar Laluk Gaon Panchayat in the district of Lakhimpur. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the elected President of the said Gaon Panchayat. Initially, a requisition for No Confidence was initiated which resulted in a meeting dated 27.05.2020 in which the petitioner was removed from the post of President due to want of Confidence. The said decision was the subject matter of challenge in WP(C)/2329/2020. This Court after hearing all the parties had come to a finding that the petitioner was able to make out certain aberrations of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, more particularly, with regard to the requirement of Sections 15, 18 and 63 and therefore, after taking the consent of the parties while setting aside the said resolution had directed that a fresh No Confidence Motion meeting be held on 14.09.2020 at the Office of the Karunabari Anchalik Panchayat in the district of Lakhimpur at 10.30 A.M., which was to be held under the aegis of the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur, who would depute a suitable Officer.

¶3Accordingly, a fresh meeting was held on the scheduled date in which the Chief Executive Officer, Lakhimpur Zila Parishad and Executive Officer, Karunabari Anchalik Panchayat were also present, who supervised the meeting. The meeting culminated in a resolution where 7 members had voted in favour of the No Confidence and three against the Motion resulting in removal of the petitioner as President of the concerned Uttar Laluk Gaon Panchayat.

¶4The learned Senior Counsel has submitted that since the initial notice was not in accordance with law, the proceedings of the meeting dated 14.09.2020 cannot be said to be legal. He submits that though this Court had directed holding of a fresh No Confidence Motion, the initiation of the same was done by a requisition notice which was in violation of the law and therefore, it is a fit case for interference and the petitioner be allowed to continue as the President of the Gaon Panchayat.

¶5On the other hand, Shri Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P & RD Department submits that the order dated 02.09.2020 by which a new meeting was directed to be Page No.# 5/5 held was an order passed on consensus of the parties and therefore, the petitioner cannot turn around and challenge the proceeding of the meeting held on 14.09.2020 only because the result is against her.

¶6The same view has been endorsed by Shri N. Goswami, learned State Counsel.

¶7Shri Gayan, learned counsel for the private respondent nos. 8 to 14 submits that as on today all the 10 Members are against the petitioner and therefore, there is no miscarriage of justice.

¶8After hearing the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that firstly the order passed by this Court on 02.09.2020 in WP(C)/ 2329/2020 was not put to further challenge and had attained finality. In the said order, this Court while tacitly interfering with the requisition notice after noticing that majority of Members are against the petitioner, who were also contesting the case and the entire process being a number game, substantial justice would be done if an opportunity is given to the parties to prove their respective cases in which the adequate opportunity, as contemplated by the Act in question, was also given in terms of the period from the notice till holding of the meeting. In the said meeting, it is found that 7 Members of the Gaon Panchayat had voted in favour of the No Confidence Motion which is more than what is required under the law.

¶9Under those facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no formidable grounds or legal tenable grounds are able to be made out for interference and accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010121892021 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/4186/2021o BIJUoSAIKIAo W/O-oSRIoDILIPoSAIKIA,oR/O-oRAMPURKACHAJULI,oWARDoNO.4,o RAMPURKACHAJULI,oP.O.oGABHORUoTUNIJAN,oPIN-o784160,oDIST.-o LAKHIMPUR,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo13oORSo REP.oBYoTHEoSECY.,oPANCHAYAToANDoRURALoDEVELOPMENT,oDISPUR,o ASSAM,o781006 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoPANCHAYAToANDoRURALoDEVELOPMENT oGHY-22 3:THEoDY.oCOMMISSIONER oLAKHIMPUR o787001 4:LAKHIMPURoZILAoPARISHAD oTHROUGHoTHEoCHIEFoEXECUTIVEoOFFICER oLAKHIMPUR o787031 5:THEoANCHALIKoPANCHAYAT oTHROUGHoTHEoEXECUTIVEoOFFICERoKARUNABARI oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oP.O.oBIHPURIA o784161 6:THEoUTTARoLALUKoGAONoPANCHAYAT oTHROUGHoTHEoSECY. oP.O.oLALUK PageoNo.#o2/5 oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oP.O.oBIHPURIA o784160 7:THEoBLOCKoDEVELOPMENToOFFICER oKARUNABARIoDEVELOPMENToBLOCK oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oP.O.oBIHPURIA o784161 8:DHARMESWARoDUTTA oS/O-oLT.oLABURAMoDUTTA oVILL-oBISHNUPUR oP.O.oJORIGURI oWARD-o1oNO.oBISHNUPUR oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-o784160 9:SADANANDAoKAWA oS/O-oLT.oJIBANoKAWA oVILL-oBISHRAMPUR oWARD-o3oNO.oBISHRAMPUR oP.O.oJORIGURI oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-o784160 10:BORNALIoBORAHoHAZARIKA oW/O-oSRIoJAYANTAoHAZARIKA oVILL-oRAMPURoKACHAJULI oP.O.oGABHORUoTUNIJAN oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-o784160 11:BARNALIoMORANG oW/O-oSRIoLOBOoMORANG oVILL-oBALIGAON oWARD-o6oNO.oRANGJAN oP.O.oGABHORUoTUNIJAN oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-o784160 12:MONISHAoDEORI oD/O-oSRIoDIBYAoDEORI oVILL-oPADMAPUR Page No.# 3/5 WARD- 7 NO. PADMAPUR P.O. GABHORU TUNIJAN DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 784160 13:ADITA BORA DUTTA W/O- JINTU DUTTA VILL- KOROTIPAR WARD 2 NO. BOGORI DIST.- LAKHIMPUR P.O. HARMOTI MERBIL PIN- 784160 14:JAMINA AKHTAR BEGUM D/O- MD. AKBAR ALI VILL- GORHMUR WARD- 10. NO. GARMUR WARD P.O. LALUK DIST.- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN- 78416 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R P SARMAH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI