Page No.# 1/9 GAHC030007002025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/126/2025 Sh. Ganesh Kumar and 4 Ors. S/o Toronimon, R/o Fangfarlui Village, Lawngtlai District, Mizoram 2: Sh. Tika Chakma 3: Sh. Bolitong 4: Sh. Daya Lal 5: Smt. Saw Bu VERSUS The Lai Autonomous District Council (LADC) and 5 Ors. R/b The Chief Executive Member, Lawngtlai, Mizoram 2:The Executive Member i/c LAD Lai Autonomous District Council (LADC) 3:The Local Administratibe Officer Lai Autonomous District Council (LADC) 4:Sh. Biro Kumar 5:Sh. Jugulukia 6:Smt. Shri Dev Page No.# 2/9 Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. R. Lalhmunsiama for R 1-3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 27.10.2025 Heard Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. Lalhmunsiama, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. 2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the Notification No. V.11012/5/2024-LADC/LAD, dated 07.10.2025, by which, Fangfarlui Village Council was suspended; and also the Notification No. V.11012/5/2024-LADC/LAD, dated 07.10.2025, by which an Enquiry Commission was appointed and show cause notice No. V.11012/5/2024- LADC/LAD, dated 25.09.2025, was issued; and also to allow the petitioners to function in the same capacity as President, Vice President, Treasurer and Members of the Fangfarlui Village Council, with backwages for the entire period the said village council was suspended. 3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under: “The petitioners are elected members of Fangfarlui Village Council, in the general election to the Village Council of 34-Fangfarlui, under Lai Autonomous Council held on 27.06.2024. After the election, an Executive Body, consisting of a President, a Vice President and a Treasurer and a Secretary, was formed in respect of the Village Council, Fangfarlui, and the Page No.# 3/9 present petitioner No. 1 was the President, the petitioner No. 2 was the Vice President, the petitioner No. 3 was the Treasurer and the petitioner Nos. 4 and 5 were the members of Village Council. The tenure of the Village Council is three years from the date of its first meeting as per Section 6 the Lai Autonomous District (Village Councils) Act, 2010 (‘Act of 2010’, for short), which was amended from time to time, and that one provision, which provides an exception to Section 6 is Section 10 and Section 11 of the Act of 2010, which provides for dissolution of the Village Council before the end of three years. While the petitioners were functioning in their respective capacities in Fangfarlui Village Council, an unknown person submitted a complaint, dated NIL to the Lai Autonomous District Council (‘LADC’, for short) authorities without addressing any specific authority in the LADC, against the Fangfarlui Village Council, by making some very baseless allegations against them, which was politically motivated and with the objective to topple the Village Council run by the petitioners and to have it replaced by a Village Council, run by their choice of persons belonging to their political party. Thereafter, a proceeding was initiated against the petitioners and a show cause notice No. V.11012/5/2024-LADC/LAD, dated 25.09.2025, was issued by the respondent No. 3, calling upon the petitioners to submit their reply as to why action should not be taken against them, on or before 30.09.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 had submitted his reply on 29.09.2025, denying the allegation against Fangfarlui Village Council. Thereafter, the respondent No. 3 had appointed an Enquiry Commission, vide Notification No. V.11012/5/2024-LADC/LAD, dated 07.10.2025, to enquire into the Fangfarlui Village Council. Thereafter, vide Notification No. Page No.# 4/9 V.11012/5/2024-LADC/LAD, dated 07.10.2025, the respondent No. 3 had suspended Fangfarlui Village Council in contravention to the provision of law, until the Enquiry Commission submits its report. It is the contention of the petitioners that while placing the Fangfarlui Village Council under suspension, the respondent authorities have invoked a wrong section of law and appointed the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 to assume the powers and functions of the Village Council during the period of suspension by the same Notification. Further contention of the petitioners is that the relevant provision for suspension of Village Council is being provided under Section 11 of the Lai Autonomous District Council (Village Councils) Act, 2010, and meanwhile, the respondent authorities, vide impugned Notification dated 07.10.2025, had suspended Fangfarlui Village Council by invoking Section 11(1) of the Lai Autonomous District Council (Village Councils) (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2023 (‘Act of 2023’, for short), which is not as per Section 11 of the Act of 2010, and as such, the impugned Notification dated 07.10.2025, by which Fangfarlui Village Council was suspended, is liable to be set aside and quashed. It is the further contention of the petitioners that an Enquiry Commission shall be appointed as provided under Section 10(1) of the Act of 2010. However, in the instant case, the Enquiry Commission was formed by invoking Section 10(1) of the Act of 2023, which is not as per Section 10(1) of the Act of 2010. It is also the contention of the petitioners that the Care Takers to assume the powers and functions of the Village Council shall be appointed as provided under section 11(1) of Act of 2010. However, in the instant case, Care Takers were appointed by Page No.# 5/9 invoking section 11(2) of the Act of 2023, which is not as per Section 11(1) of the Act of 2010, and that Section 11(2) is not available in the Act of 2023. It is also the contention of the petitioners that it is incumbent on the respondent authorities to issue show cause notices to the petitioners before making its conclusion or coming to its findings, especially when the said findings could result into suspension of the Fangfarlui Village Council, and that giving of a valid notice to the proper or concerned person, of the facts of the matter and nature of action, proposed to be taken is a sine qua non of a fair hearing. But, no notice was issued by the respondent authorities to the petitioners before suspension of the Village Council, and that suspension of the Village Council should not be resorted to, except in extreme cases of proven inefficiency or inability of the said Village Council or indulgence in corrupt practices in the matter of Village administration, whereas in the present case, there is no proof of inefficiency of inability of the said Village Council or indulgence in corrupt practices, and under such circumstances, it is contended to set aside the impugned Notification regarding suspension of the Fangfarlui Village Council and also the Notification in respect of constitution of the Enquiry Commission.” 4. Mr. Chawngthu, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent authorities, on the basis of an anonymous complaint, which was not even addressed to the respondent authorities, had issued show cause notice to the petitioner and they had submitted their reply, and thereafter, placed the elected Village Council under suspension, and also constituted one Enquiry Commission by invoking wrong provision of law, and therefore, it is contended to set aside the impugned Notification regarding suspension of the Fangfarlui Page No.# 6/9 Village Council and also the impugned Notification regarding constitution of Enquiry Commission. He also raised his concern about acting upon an anonymous complaint and submits that the action of the authority is tainted with mala fide and political vendetta and it also contravene the principles of natural justice and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition. 5. Mr. Lalhmunsiama, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, on instruction, submits that he had advised the respondent authorities to issue the notification under proper provision of law, but the respondent authorities have failed comply with the same. He further submits that as the impugned notifications were issued suspending the Fangfarlui Village Council and constituting an Enquiry Commission invoking wrong provision of law, the same may be set aside granting liberty to the respondent authorities to issue fresh notification in accordance with law. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also gone through the impugned Notifications dated 07.10.2025, and the anonymous complaint. 7. The basic facts, herein this case, are not in dispute. The petitioner are elected members of Fangfarlui Village Council in the general election to the Village Council of 34-Fangfarlui under Lai Autonomous Council held on 27.06.2024, and an Executive Body consisting of a President, a Vice President and a Treasurer and a Secretary was formed in respect of the Village Council, Fangfarlui, and the present petitioner No. 1 was the President, the petitioner No. 2 was the Vice President, the petitioner No. 3 was the Treasurer and the petitioner Nos. 4 and 5 were members of Village Council. The tenure of the Village Council is three years, from the date of its first meeting as per Section 6 Page No.# 7/9 the Lai Autonomous District (Village Councils) Act, 2010 (‘Act of 2010’, for short), which was amended from time to time. It is also not in dispute that an anonymous complaint was received by the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 against the Fangfarlui Village Council, and the said complaint is annexed with the petition as Annexure-5A, at page No. 59, and on the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners and the petitioner No. 1 had submitted his reply on 29.09.2025, and thereafter, an Enquiry Commission was appointed, vide impugned Notification dated 07.10.2025, by appointing TH Lalbiakliana, R&SO, Bungtlang South, as per Section 10(1) of the Act of 2023, and vide impugned Notification dated 07.10.2025, Fangfarlui Village Council was suspended w.e.f. 07.10.2025, and appointed three persons, namely, Biro Kumar (Acting VCP), Jugulukia (Member) and Shri Devi [Member (V/P)], to assume powers and functions of the Village Council during the period of suspension, as per Section 11(2) of the Act of 2023. 8. It is to be noted here that suspension of Village Council is provided under Section 11(1) of the Act of 2010 and appointment of Commission is provided under Section 10(1) of the said Act. But, in the instant case, it appears that the Village Council was suspended, vide Notification dated 07.10.2025, invoking Section 11(1) of the Act of 2023 and the Enquiry Commission was constituted under Section 10(1) of the Act of 2023. However, a perusal of the Act of 2023, which was notified in the Official Gazette on 10.04.2024, indicates that Section 10(1) and 11(1) of the Act of 2023 speaks otherwise, which does not provide for appointment of Commission and dissolution of the Village Council. 9. It is well settled in a catena of decisions by Hon’ble Supreme Court that if the manner of doing a particular act is prescribed under a statute, the said act must be done in that manner and not in any other manner. Reference in this Page No.# 8/9 context can be made to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Chandra Kishore Jha vs Mahavir Prasad & Ors., reported in (1999) 8 SCC 266 and Cherukuri Mani vs. Chief Secretary, Govt. of A.P.& Ors., reported in (2015) 13 SCC 722. 10. Since the Village Council was not suspended and the Enquiry Commission was not formed in accordance with the actual provision of law prescribed under the Act of 2023, this Court is of the view that the impugned Notifications dated 07.10.2025, constituting an Enquiry Commission and also suspension of the Fangfarlui Village Council are not in accordance with law, and as such, the same fail to withstand the legal scrutiny. And accordingly and as agreed upon by learned counsel for both the parties, the same stand set aside and quashed. 11. Consequently, the petitioners are to be reinstated in their capacity as President, Vice President, Treasurer and Members of the Fangfarlui Village Council and also they shall be paid backwages for the period of suspension. 12. A distinctive attribute or aspect of the matter, which is disturbing also, is that the Fangfarlui Village Council was suspended on the basis of an anonymous complaint, which was addressed to none and no date was also mentioned there. Throwing out the body, elected in accordance with the provision of the Constitution, on the basis of an anonymous complaint, which was addressed to none as well as undated, would set a dangerous precedent. 13. Mr. Lalhmunsiama, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 submits that if the complaint was made by the name, then the petitioners would have taken action against the said person and on the fear of such an action by the petitioners herein, the anonymous complaint was lodged and the Enquiry Commission was constituted to ascertain the veracity of the allegations made in Page No.# 9/9 the complaint. 14. The submission of Mr. Lalhmunsiama, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 left this Court unimpressed, inasmuch as the general procedure is that receipt of a written complaint supported by evidence, should follow by a preliminary inquiry and thereafter, if materials are found then to issue show cause notice and only thereafter, further action has to follow. It is to be noted here that though not relevant in the case in hand, yet, the Vigilance Manual Chapter-III Clause 3.3.1 may be a guiding principle in dealing with anonymous complaint, which provides that no action should be initiated upon an anonymous complaint. Same proposition is stated in the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, Office Memorandum dated 9th October, 2024 and Clause 2 of the said O.M. provides that no action is required to be taken on anonymous complaints, irrespective of the nature of allegations, and they should be filed. And accordingly, the submission of Mr. Lalhmunsiama same stands repudiated. 15. However, the respondent authorities are granted liberty to proceed against the Fangfarlui Village Council, if known person files complaint supported by an affidavit against them and thereafter, conducting a preliminary enquiry and in accordance with law. 16. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at this motion stage itself. JUDGE Comparing Assistant