Page No.# 1/10 GAHC010010102025 2025:GAU-AS:6290 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/549/2025 PHANIDHAR PAWE AND 11 ORS S/O LATE BHADARAM PAWE, R/O VILL- NO. 2 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON, P.O.-ISLAMGAON, P.S.-BIHPURIA, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM, PIN-787054 2: PRAMAN BORI S/O LATE SARURAM BORI R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 3: KUSHAL MORANG S/O LATE PREMADHAR MORANG R/O VILL- NO. 2 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 4: BISHNU PAWE S/O LATE NAGEN PAWE R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 5: JATIN MORANG S/O LATE KABINDRA MORANG R/O VILL- NO. 2 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON Page No.# 2/10 P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 6: RATUL PAWE S/O LATE MINARAM PAWE R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 7: DIPJYOTI MIRI S/O SRI NAKUL MIRI R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 8: RAMCHARAN MILI S/O LATE MAISYARAM MILI R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 9: TULSHI PAWE S/O LATE RAJANI PAWE R/O VILL- NO. 1 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-787054 10: AJIT MORANG S/O SRI HEMCHANDRA MORANG R/O VILL- NO. 2 BONGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR Page No.# 3/10 ASSAM PIN-78705 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, TRANSFORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781006 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 3:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KARUNABARI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 4:VILLAGE LEVEL COMMITTEE AXOM ADARXO GRAM YOJANA BANGALMARA MIRI GAON REPRESENTED BY THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KARUNABARI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 5:THE CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ART AND CULTURE TRAINING CENTER AT SANKARDEVA KRISTI VIKASH KENDRA AT BANGALMARA MIRI REPRESENTED BY THE GAON PRADHAN BANGALMARA MIRI GAON P.O.-ISLAMGAON P.S.-BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-78705 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS N DEKA, MR SAURADEEP DEY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R Page No.# 4/10 20.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. S.S. Roy, learned State Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. K. Konwar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam and Standing Counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development (P&RD) Department for the respondent nos. 3, 4 & 5. 2. The petitioners are permanent residents of Village – Bangalmara Miri Gaon. It is stated that Village - Bangalmara Miri Gaon has been adopted as a model village under the rural welfare scheme named ‘Axom Adarxo Gram Yojana’, which envisages creation of model villages with good quality public services. 3. Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioners by referring to the scheme, ‘Axom Adarxo Gram Yojana’ has submitted that the concerned Gram Sabha of the model village is one of the authorities who can propose different schemes and it is only with the approval of the Gram Sabha, a scheme can be implemented in a model village. In case of model Village - Bangalmara Miri Gaon, the Gram Sabha in its meeting held on 17.10.2024, had proposed two schemes – (i) Construction of a Village Secretariat; and (ii) Construction of a road at the village. But the respondent no. 3 vide its Notification dated 11.12.2024 had deviated from the scheme proposed by the Gram Sabha, that is, ‘Construction of a road at the village’ and sanctioned another scheme, ‘Construction of Art and Culture Training Centre at Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra at Bangalmara Miri’. He has submitted that so far as the first scheme is concerned, the respondent no. 3 has sanctioned the same vide a Notification dated 09.12.2024. Assailing the sanction of the scheme, ‘Construction of Art and Culture Training Centre at Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra at Bangalmara Miri’, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition. Page No.# 5/10 4. The respondent State has filed an affidavit through the District Development Commissioner, Lakhimpur and contends that the Gram Sabha in its meeting held on 13.11.2024 discussed construction of Art and Culture Training Centre at Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra at Bangalmara Miri village and minutes of such meeting was signed by Sankari Gaon Pradhan and 123 members were present in the meeting and therefore, the petitioners cannot object to the decision of the State inasmuch as according to the State respondents such decision is inconformity with scheme itself. 5. 5. Another contention raised by the State respondent is that construction of the road cannot be accepted in view of the policy decision taken under AAGY in the meeting held on 06.07.2024, presided by the Hon’ble Chief Minister. In the said meeting the projects under AAGY are confined only to 10 important schemes, which excludes construction of a road and includes cultural centre. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. Countering such argument, Mr. Dey, learned counsel submits that it is clear in the meeting dated 13.11.2024, the villagers objected the construction of Art and Culture Training Centre at Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra and therefore, the decision to construct Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra is against the scheme of the AAGY inasmuch as at that point of time it was not pointed out that construction of road is not permissible. Therefore, had such information were given by the District Commissioner, the villagers would have certainly opted for other available schemes, however, the villagers were admittedly did not agree to a cultural centre. Accordingly, the learned counsel submits that the matter is required to be relegated back to the Gram Sabha to take a fresh decision in this regards. 7. I have considered the argument advanced by the learned counsel for Page No.# 6/10 the parties. The whole basis of the claim and counter claim is based on the scheme named ‘Axom Adarxo Gram Yojana’ (hereinafter referred to as the AAGY). Such scheme was introduced recognising the need for holistic and all ground development of villages in the State. The scheme under paragraph 1.1 to 1.5 deal with its aim, vision, mission and objectives, which go to show that such scheme was introduced with a background idea for development of villages by creating model villages where good quality public services such as sanitation facilities, functional roads, drainage, reliable electricity, clean drinking water, school and health care institutions are planned for benefit of all the citizens. 8. The aim of the scheme is to provide infrastructure and quality last mile service delivery and to empower the villagers towards self sustainable development. 9. The vision behind such policy is to create good social and economic infrastructure and provide platform for improvement of standard of living and self sustainable livelihood in villages. 10. The mission was to develop two model villages in each of the 126 Assembly Constituencies of Assam by adopting a strategy that promote holistic and inclusive social economic development with an object to act as a catalyst that leads to the holistic development for identified villages. 11. A detail procedure and activities is also prescribed in the scheme itself. Different committees have been proposed at the top the staring committee and at the bottom the village level committees. The village level committee is constituted under the Chairmanship of Circle Officer or Block Development Officer and the Member Secretary is the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat. The preparation of village development plan and action is to be carried out through specific village development plan (VDP). The role and responsibility of village Page No.# 7/10 level committee includes preparation of village development plan through participatory rural appraisal and with consultation with stakeholders and villagers and Gram Sabha. 12. Thus, from the aforesaid, it is seen that one of the thrust of the scheme is to involve the villagers through the Gram Sabha in preparation of the village development plan. 13. In the case in hand, what is discernible from the record and the minutes of the meeting of the Gram Sabha, which are not in dispute, is to the effect that on 07.10.2024, a meeting was held under the AAGY. Two proposals were made i.e. firstly the construction of a village secretariat and second one is construction of the village’s model roads. Thus, in the meeting of the villagers on 07.10.2024, these two proposals were anonymously decided to be implemented. Thereafter, a special meeting was held on 13.11.2024 as there was a dispute as regards construction of the road and cultural development centre. However, it is seen from the said meeting that there was no unanimous decision and there were two proposals, firstly a cultural training centre, which should include a guest house, a library and a kitchen. Another proposal was as regard construction of a Namghar and the third proposal was to allocate fund to Bangalmara Sankari Sangha Cultural Development Centre. However, finally majority of the people present in the meeting again reiterated construction of a village road. 14. From the aforesaid meeting, it is clear that majority of the people opined for other roads and at that stage the District Development Commissioner assured that all these matters would be communicated to the higher authority. Subsequently, the impugned decision to construct the Art and Cultural Training Centre at Sankardev Kristi Vikash Kendra at Bangalmara Miri was approved. Page No.# 8/10 15. In this context, it is important to record that a meeting of the implementing authorities of AAGY was held on 06.07.2024 at the Chief Minister Conference Hall and in the said meeting a decision was taken that the scheme should be confined only to 10 important developments projects i.e. Development of AWCs High School, LP/ ME school, Namghar, Cultural Centre, Mahila Samittee Offices, Yubak Sangha, Library, Development of Cremation Grounds, Sports Club, Computer Training Centre for students etc., in consultation with District Commissioners. It was also decided in the meeting that all District Commissioners shall have to choose from these self identified schemes from now onwards and no other schemes outside the identified self of schemes shall be allowed. 16. Thus, what was decided in the meeting dated 06.07.2024 that the schemes are to be identified and confined to certain schemes only. In that view of the matter, this court cannot find fault with the authorities in not approving the majority decision of the Gram Sabha that a road should be constructed inasmuch as construction of road is excluded from the purview of such scheme. 17. Having held that, this court cannot also be oblivious to the fact that the basis of the scheme is involvement and participation of the villagers in preparing the development plan of the villages. In the case in hand, from the minutes of the meeting dated 13.11.2024 it can safely be concluded that there was no majority decision as regards construction of Namghar or Cultural Centre rather it was an unanimous decision to opt for a road which is not permissible. Therefore, in the totality of the matter instead of unilaterally deciding a development scheme for the villagers, a fresh Gram Sabha Meeting ought to have been held as the decision of the villagers for a road cannot be implemented and therefore, in other words the villagers ought to have been Page No.# 9/10 given another opportunity to take a decision and prepare development plan, which has not been done in the present case. 18. This court cannot be unmindful of the fact that this court cannot issue any direction to the State authorities what scheme should be implemented in the village, only on the basis of the prayer made in a writ petition. What this court can look into is, whether while preparing such scheme the procedure prescribed under the scheme is followed or not. In the case in hand, as recorded hereinabove, the basic object is to involve the villagers for creation of the model villages and in that regard the preparation of village development plan is also delegated to the Gram Sabha and the villagers. It is another thing whether such decision can be implemented or not under the scheme, but the villagers will have a right to choose their schemes from the list of approved scheme. However, in the case in hand, such right of the villagers have been violated by unilaterally imposing a scheme. Therefore, in the totality of the matter, the impugned decision of the respondents dated 09.12.2024 by approving construction of ‘Construction of Art and Culture Training Centre at Sankardeva Kristi Vikash Kendra at Bangalmara Miri’, shall remain suspended till a fresh decision is taken by the Gram Sabha holding a fresh meeting. 19. Accordingly, the District Development Commissioner/ concerned BDO/ concerned Circle Officer is directed to hold a fresh Gram Sabha Meeting to take a decision in this regard with an intimation to the Gram Sabha that they can only choose which are categorised and identified in the meeting dated 06.07.2024 held in the Chief Minister Conference Hall. 20. The majority decision may be implemented by the competent authorities, if the same comes within the identified scheme otherwise the impugned decision dated 09.12.2024 shall revive. Page No.# 10/10 21. It is also made clear that if the decision has already been implemented it will be futile to take a fresh decision. Accordingly, it is made clear that if the project has already been started, no fresh decision is required to be taken. 22. With the aforesaid observation and determination, the writ petition stands closed. Parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant