Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010112142024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2960/2024 ABDUS SALAM S/O- ABDUL KHALEK, VILL.- NO.1 BORALIMARI, P.O.- PUB BORALIMARI, P.S.- JURIA, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782124. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-06. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORD AND SURVEYS ASSAM RUPNAGAR GHY.-32. 3:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) NAGAON P.O. AND DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM) PIN- 782001. 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DHING REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. AND P.S.- DHING DIST.- NAGAON (ASSAM) Page No.# 2/6 PIN- 782126 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H ALI, B BARMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 27.02 .2025 Heard Mr. H. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharyaa, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5 and Mr. J. Handique, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, whose grievance is that his appointment as a Gaon Pradhan of Lot No. 3 of village No. 1 Boralimari Part, Alitangani Mouza under Dhing Revenue Circle in the District of Nagaon was cancelled by the District Commissioner, Nagaon. Purportedly under the directions issued by the Court vide order dated 31.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 1693 of 2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the advertisement was issued by the District Commissioner vide advertisement dated 05.09.2022, where the particulars of the village was reflected under the Dhing Revenue Circle. In the said village his father namely Lt. Abdul Khalek was the earlier Gaon Pradhan and pursuant to his expiry the petitioner was given charge to look after the affairs of the Office. Thereafter, in pursuance to the advertisement Page No.# 3/6 dated 05.09.2022, the petitioner applied for the post of Gaon Pradhan and he was shortlisted and subsequently appointed as the Gaon Pradhan of village No. 1 Boralimari Part. WP(C) No. 1693 of 2023 was filed by a person whose grievance before the Court was that he being the President of village No. 1 Boralimari Part in the district of Nagaon he was aggrieved by the appointment of the present writ petitioner as Gaon Pradhan of village No.1 Baralimari Part and who was arrayed as respondent No. 7 in the said writ petition. According to the said writ petitioner, there is no village by the name of Boralimari under the said Mouza. But there is villages namely No.1 Baralimari, No.2 Baralimari and Pub- Kaladuba under Alitangani Mouza. The petitioner in the said writ petition had submitted before the Court that in respect of No.1 Boralimari village, of which the said petitioner was a resident, there was already a Gaon Pradhan appointed. As such the respondent No.7 mainly the present petitioner could not have been appointed as a Gaon Pradhan. Being aggrieved, the said writ petition was filed. In view of the facts urged before the Court in that writ petition, this Court considered it appropriate to dispose of the said writ petition directing the petitioner therein to file a necessary representation before the District Commissioner, Nagaon ventilating his grievance and directed that such representation to be disposed of within a period of 30(thirty) days. In deference to the order dated 31.03.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 1693/2023 the District Commissioner, Nagaon disposed of the representation by order dated 07.05.2024 and which order is assailed in the present proceedings. By the impugned order dated 07.05.2024, the advertisement published vide No.NRK 31/2022/04, dated 29.04.2022 for filling Page No.# 4/6 up the vacant post of Gaon Pradhan of Alitangani Mouza, Lot Boralimari under Dhing Revenue Circle was withdrawn and the selection of the present petitioner under the said Mouza stood cancelled. Being aggrieved the present writ petitioner is before this Court. The respondents have contested the matter by filing an affidavit. They have raised the objection with regard to maintainability in view of Regulation 162-C of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1889 (as amended) that there is an Appellate Forum before the Director of Land Records in respect of any orders that may be passed by the District Commissioner in respect of the appointment or cancellation or suspension of Gaon Pradhan. The petitioner had not taken recourse to the Statutory Appellate Forum. It is further urged before this Court that the order was passed after duly considering the reports given by the Lot Mandal and the concerned Revenue Circle. The Government Advocates representing the respondents submits that the impugned order was passed in deference to the order of this Court dated 31.03.2023 in WP(C) No. 1693 of 2023 and, the order was passed cancelling the appointment of the petitioner and also withdrawing the vacancy advertised for Alitangani Mouza, Lot Boralimari under Dhing Revenue Circle. The learned Government Advocate submits that since this was wrongly advertised and already Gaon Pradhan has been appointed to look after the Office of the said village, there is no scope for the petitioner to be subsequently appointed as a Gaon Pradhan of the same village or a part thereof. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the pleadings Page No.# 5/6 available on the case record has been perused. The Court has also taken note of the earlier order dated 31.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 1693 of 2023. By the said order the writ petition was closed giving liberty to the petitioner therein to file his application before the District Commissioner, Nagaon and thereafter the District Commissioner of Nagaon was directed to dispose of the representation by passing a speaking order and any opportunity of hearing, if desired by the petitioner can also be afforded. The present impugned order dated 07.05.2024 passed by the District Commissioner cancelling the appointment of the petitioner as Gaon Pradhan. Upon perusal of the said order, it clearly reveals that this order was passed in deference to the order dated 31.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 1693 of 2023 but this order does not reflect that any opportunity of hearing or any notice for that matter was served to the present petitioner who admittedly was appointed and was holding the Office of village No.1 Boralimari under Alitangani Mouza of Dhing Revenue Circle. This Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner ought to have been served with a notice when the petitioner was issued the appointment order for the said post of Gaon Pradhan in pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Government, which the Government subsequently has withdrawn the advertisement insofar as the village No.1 Boralimari under Alitangani Mouza Dhing Revenue Circle. The advertisement having shown the concerned village and the petitioner having participated in the selection process and thereafter, appointed, basic Rules of natural justice demand that the petitioner ought to have been served with a notice and the petitioner ought to have been heard before the impugned order was passed. It has to be borne in mind that even while exercising administrative powers the mandate of natural justice is inherent and the same is required to be complied with by giving an opportunity of the affected person of being heard. Page No.# 6/6 Under such circumstances, the matter is remanded back to the District Commissioner, Nagaon to examine the matter, afresh and pass any such speaking order upon hearing all the affected parties including the present writ petitioner and upon taking into consideration the relevant reports furnished by the Lot Mandal and the Circle Officer. Any such order that is passed copies thereof will be served on all the stakeholders including the present petitioner. The consequential order that is required to be passed by the District Commissioner, Nagaon pursuant in the Court's order will supersede the earlier order dated 07.05.2024 whereby the petitioner's appointment as a Gaon Pradhan was cancelled. Until the said order is passed by the District Commissioner as directed status quo will be maintained by the parties. In the event the petitioner is still aggrieved by any such order passed by the District Commissioner, Nagaon, the petitioner will have recourse to statutory appeals as may be provided under the Regulations, Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886. Accordingly, this writ petition disposed of with the above observations. JUDGE Comparing Assistant