Page No.# 1/7 GAHC030007272024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/130/2024 Sh. Remchhunga and 2 Ors S/o Chawngchhungi R/o Sialhawk Village, Khawzawl District, Mizoram 2: Sh. J. Rampanmawia 3: Smt. Laltlankim VERSUS State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary to GOM and 6 Ors Aizawl2:The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram 3:The Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram 4:The Director 5:The District Local Administration Officer (DLAO) 6:The Field Inspector (FI) 7:Sh. W. Chhuanawma MLA 22-Tuichang (ST) Assembly Constituency Mizora Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu Page No.# 2/7 Advocate for the Respondent : Addl. AG/GA, Mizoram for R1 - R6 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 04.02.2025 Heard Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Caroline K Lungawipuii, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 6. None appears for respondent No. 7 despite service. [2] By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the Order dated 17.10.2024 by which, the Village Council of Sialhawk under Khawzawl District has been suspended with effect from the date of issuance of the said order. The facts of the case in brief has already been recorded in the order dated 03.02.2025 and therefore, for the sake of brevity and convenience, the same is being reproduced below:- “Heard Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that the three (3) petitioners are the President, Vice President and Treasurer of Sialhawk Village Council and that they are aggrieved with the Order dated 17.10.2024 by which the Village Council has been suspended under Section 25(1) of the Village Councils Act, 2015 with immediate effect. [2.] The learned counsel submits that no written complaint had been Page No.# 3/7 submitted from any quarters nor was copy, if any, was given to the petitioners. In fact, it was on the verbal instructions of the local MLA that a spot verification was conducted on 20.05.2024 by the District Local Administration Officer along with a Field Inspector and Technical Assistant. The District Local Administration Officer submitted the spot verification report to the Director, Local Administration Department on 31.05.2024. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to the President/Secretary of the Village Council on 15.07.2024 stating that an explanation should be submitted by the Village Council within 15 days as to why the Village Council should not be dissolved. Although the Village Council President submitted a written explanation on 25.07.2024, the respondent authority concerned issued the impugned Order dated 17.10.2024 suspending the Village Council with immediate effect. Aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court. [3.] Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel submits there are five (5) elected members to the Village Council and one Secretary appointed under Section 7 (2) of the Village Councils Act. The learned counsel submits that a copy of the spot verification report was not given to the petitioners and that show cause notice was given only to the President/Secretary of the Village Council and not to the others. He submits under the circumstance, the principles of natural justice have been violated and the impugned Order of suspension should be set aside. The learned counsel also submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by a recent decision of this Court in WP(C) Nos. 82 & 88/2024. Page No.# 4/7 [4.] The impugned Order dated 17.10.2024 shows that the same has been issued in terms of Section 25(1) of the Village Councils Act. The last proviso to Section 25(1) of the Village Councils Act states that if the situation demands, the State Government may, during the enquiry on the complaints suspend the functioning of the Village Council during which the administration of such Village Council shall be exercised by a Government official appointed by the State Government. [5.] In the present case, one (1) Field Inspector has been appointed to take charge of the Village Council vide Order dated 30.1.2024. However, it is not clear as to whether any further enquiry on the complaints is being carried out during the suspension of the Village Council. [6.] Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel submits that to the knowledge of the petitioners, there is no such further enquiry conducted by the official respondents and that the Village Council has been suspended solely on the basis of the spot verification report submitted by the District Local Administration Officer. The learned counsel also submits that the said authority has exceeded its power and jurisdiction in view of the fact that in a complaint of such nature, even assuming that there was some basis to make such complaint without admitting to it, the matter ought to have been referred to the Ombudsman in terms of the Mizoram (Establishment of Independent Local Body) Ombudsman Act, 2011 notified in the Mizoram Gazette on 15.07.2011. Therefore, even for this reason, the impugned Order dated 17.10.2024 cannot be sustained and should be set aside. [7.] On a pointed query made by this Court to the learned Govt. Page No.# 5/7 Advocate Ms. Caroline K. Lungawpuii as to whether there is any ongoing enquiry to the complaint on the Village Council during its suspension, she submits that she has no instructions in this regard. She however submits that she may be given some time to get back to the Court with the instructions. [8.] The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the term of the Village Council in the entire State of Mizoram has been shortened by about six (6) months and therefore, if the impugned Order dated 17.10.2024 is allowed to remain, the writ petition would only become infructuous. [9.] Considering the above position and in view of the proviso to Section 25(1) of the Village Councils Act, the learned Govt. Advocate shall get the instructions by tomorrow. She shall also produce the relevant records by which the decision of dissolution of the Village Council has been taken in original. A copy of this Order be furnished to the learned Govt. Advocate during the course of the day for doing the needful. [10.] List the matter again tomorrow i.e., 04.02.2025.” [3] As can be seen from the above abstract, the learned Government Advocate was asked to get instructions as to whether there is any further enquiry being made by the State respondents in view of what has been stated in the 2nd paragraph of the impugned Order dated 17.10.2024. Today, the Page No.# 6/7 learned Government Advocate on instructions submits that she has been furnished with the relevant file and that it appears that there is no further process undertaken pursuant to the passing of the impugned Order dated 17.10.2024. [4] This Court has earlier taken note of the fact that there is no written complaint submitted against the Village Council and that a copy of the spot verification report submitted by the District Local Administration Officer concerned has also not been furnished to the petitioners. Further, the show- cause Notice dated 15.07.2024 has not been supplied to all the members of the Village Council. Having regard to the fact that this Court in a number of cases including the recent Judgment delivered on 27.01.2025 in WP(C) No. 88/2024 & WP(C) No. 82/2024 has held that in absence of the parties concerned being given a copy of the spot verification report and also the show-cause notice to each of the members, the same would result for violation of the principles of natural justice and for which reason alone, the impugned order of dissolution of the Village Council concerned in the two cases have been found to be unsustainable and therefore set aside. The present case is also squarely covered by the decision referred to herein above. The Order dated 17.10.2024 is therefore found to be unsustainable and accordingly set aside. The petitioners Page No.# 7/7 shall be allowed to function in terms of their respective appointments and they shall be paid the remuneration that is due to them during the period of suspension till date. [5] With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant