Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010235782023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6178/2023 NIKHIL CACHAR HAIDIMBA BARMAN SAMITI AND 2 ORS (AN ORGANIZATION OF BARMAN OF CACHAR DISTRICT) REGISTRATION NO. 1144 OF 1981-1982 OFFICE ADDRESS- TARAPUR, SILCHAR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788003, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. 2: SHUVIT BARMAN S/O- LATE MANORANJAN BARMAN PRESIDENT NIKHIL CACHAR HAIDIMBA BARMAN SAMITI R/O- DARMIKHAL RUKNI PART-IV P.O.- DHARMIKHAL GRANT DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788116. 3: KHOGENDRA BARMAN S/O- BRAJAMOHAN BARMAN GENERAL MANAGER NIKHIL CACHAR HAIDIMBA BARMAN SAMITI R/O- VIL. JALBJRA PO- JIRIGHAT CHA BAGAN PART-II DIST.- CACHAR Page No.# 2/6 ASSAM PIN- 788104 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 12 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS (PLAIN), DISPUR, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, BLOCK-D, GROUND FLOOR, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE DIRECTOR TRIBAL AFFAIRS (PLAIN) ASSAM SATRINIVASH PATH RUKMININAGAR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781006. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 4:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL WELFARE OFFICER SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788003. 5:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL WELFARE OFFICER LAKHIHPUR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS SHASTRI BHAWAN DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD NEW DELHI Page No.# 3/6 PIN- 110011. 7:THE SECRETARY ALL ASSAM TRIBAL SANGHA CACHAR DISTRICT COMMITTEE REGD. NO. 504/1976-77 OFFICE ADDRESS- MEHERPUR KAGALUANG (NAGA PUNJEE) SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788016. 8:KADUNGSING MALMGMEI GOPALGANJ NAGA COLONY SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 9:HEMPOW KAMEI KAGUILUANG NAGA COLONY DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 10:SABITA KAMEI GOPALGANJ DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 11:G ALBERT RONGMEI NAYAGANJ PO- FULERTAL DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. 12:LAKHAM LIU BINNAKANDI PART-II Page No.# 4/6 BINNAKANDI GRANT LAKHIMPUR DIST.- CACHAR DIST.- CACHAR. 13:KAMEI GOUNGDULUNG JIRIGHAT CHA BAGICHA PART-I JIRIGHAT LAKHIPUR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM. NOTICE TO BE SERVED THROUGH THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 14:RONGMEI NAGA COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI JAMU POW KABUI S/O KABENG POW KABUI RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 1 HAILAKANDI TOWN PO PS AND DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 788151 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B PURKAYASTHA, MR. S SUTRADHAR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WPT AND BC, MS. K L R YANTHAN (R-7, R-8),MRS. R RONGMEI (R-7, R-14),MR. R P SARMAH (R-7, R-14),MR P UPADHYAYA (R-7, R-8, R-14),MR. D DOLEY (R-7, R-14),DY.S.G.I.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 06.11.2025 Heard Shri B Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioners, who have put to challenge two notifications dated 19.07.2023 and dated 22.07.2023 issued by the Page No.# 5/6 Department of Tribal Affairs (P). 2. By the first notification dated 19.07.2023, three persons, who have been arrayed as the respondent nos. 8, 9 and 10, have been inducted as Members of the Sub- Divisional ST Development Board, Silchar and by the second notification dated 22.07.2023, three persons, who have been arrayed as the respondent nos.11, 12 and 13, have been inducted as Members of the Sub-Divisional ST Development Board, Lakhipur. 3. Shri Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the private respondents do not belong to the Barman community of Cachar district and therefore, cannot be termed as ST. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the guidelines of the notification dated 05.03.2020 as per which, such Boards are to be constituted and one of the primary requirements is that the Members have to belong to the SC/ST/OBC community as applicable. The learned counsel has relied upon certain case laws. 4. The aforesaid challenge has, however, been strenuously resisted by Shri R Dhar, learned Standing Counsel, Tribal Affairs Department by submitting that the edifice of the case is fallacious. He has submitted that in the State of Assam, there cannot be any distinction of Scheduled Tribe, either hills or plain except, in the aspect of electoral reservation. He has also relied upon a notification dated 24.01.1982 in this regard, and certain decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 5. Shri RP Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. R Rongmei, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 7, 8 and 14 has supported the learned Standing Counsel of the Department and has submitted that the challenge is based erroneously. He has also submitted that the term of the Board is three years and as on date, the Page No.# 6/6 Board does not exist. 6. This Court is of the opinion that without even going to the inter se merits of the case projected by the rival parties, it appears that the tenures of the Board in the Sub- divisions of Silchar and Lakhipur have expired. In this connection, this Court has taken note of Clause 4 of the notification dated 05.03.2020 as per which, the term of Board shall not exceed 3 years. 7. This Court is of the opinion that without going into the merits as indicated above, this writ petition has become infructuous and accordingly, the same is dismissed. 8. It is clarified that the question raised in this petition may be adjudicated and answered in an appropriate litigation. JUDGE Comparing Assistant