Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010020782025 2025:GAU-AS:1703- DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : PIL/15/2025 ALL BODO STUDENTS UNION AND ORS GOALPARA DISTRICT COMMITTEE, HQ BODO CULTURAL BHAWAN, COLLEGE ROAD, DUDHNOI, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI SANTASH HAZOWARY, S/O BANESWAR HAZOWARY, AGED ABOUT 47, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAJPARA, PO KACHADOL, PS RONGJULI, DIST. GOALPARA 2: ALL BODO STUDENTS UNION GOALPARA DISTRICT COMMTTTEE H Q. BODO CULTURAL BHAWAN COLLEGE ROAD DUDHNOI REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SHRI NIPAN KHAKHLARY S/O RAJA KHAKHLARY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O KUSHDHOWA RONG PARA DISTRICT GOALPARA PIN 783124 3: KUSHDHOWA TRIBAL DEV BLOCK PROTECTION COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI UKIL SUTRADHAR AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS S/O LT. GARIA RAM SUTRADHAR R/O- VILL- DEULGURI PT-II DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM Page No.# 2/9 4: KUSHDHOWA TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROTECTION COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI PRANAB KHAKHAI.ARY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O. PHUKAN KHAKHAT-ARY R/O. ULL. KUSHDHOWA RONG RONG PARA DIST.- GOALPARA ASSAM 5: BODO CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE SOUTH KAMRUP AND GOALPARA DISIRICT H.Q. DUDHNOI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI BIJAY KUMAR SWARGIARY S/O - NARENDRA SWARGIARY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS KARIGSI DAMAS DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 6: BODO CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE SOUTH KAMRUP AND GOALPARA DISTRICT H.Q DUDHNOI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SHRI NIPAN KACHARI S/O _ DEBEN I(ACHARI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS KACHARI PARA DIST Page No.# 3/9 GOALPARA ASSAM 7: ALL BODO WOMEN WELFARE FEDARATION GOALPARA DISTRICT COMMITTEE H.Q. DUDHNOI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. JEUTI BASUMATARY C/O KESHAB BASUMATARY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O. - BHALUICULI PT.1 P.O. KAHIBARI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN 783130 8: DULARAI BORO BARODOL HQ. AMJONGA DIST GOALPARA ASSAM BY ITS PRESIDENT SHRI ANANTA KR. BORO S/O JOGENDRA BORO AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/O CHUCHIYA PATHAR PT 2 MANUPARA GOALPARA ASSAM PIN 783124 9: KUSHDHOWA ANCHOLIK UNNAYAN COMMITTEE HQ. AND P.O. KUSHDHOWA DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM RERESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DHARANI KT. BASUMATARY SON OF Page No.# 4/9 SON OF SIB CHARAN BASUMATARY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS VILL MAZPARA P.O. KUSHDHOWA DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6. 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 4:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER DOWNTOWN DISPUR GUWAHATI 5:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 6:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM PANJABARI JURIPAR Page No.# 5/9 GUWAHATI-37 7:THE DISTRICT DELIMITATION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITSCHAIRMAN CUM DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOALPARA P.O. AND DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 8:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM 9:THE MEMBER SECRETARY DISTRICT DELIMITATION COMMISSION CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER GOALPARA ZILLA PARISHAD P.O DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 10:THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER GOALPARA P.O DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 11:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DUDHNOI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK DISTRICT GOALPARA ASSAM 12:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KUSHDHOWA TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT BLOCK KUSHDHOWA DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 13:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DUDHNOI REVENUE CIRCLE DUDHNOI DISTRICT-GOALPARA ASSAM Page No.# 6/9 For the petitioners : Mr. R. Dhar, Mr. R. Majumdar, Mr. B.C. Muchahary, Advocates For the respondents : Mr. S.K. Medhi, C.G.C. for respondent No.1 Mr. K. Konwar, Addl. A.G., Assam Mr. N. Das, Govt. Advocate, Assam For respondent Nos.2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 Mr. J. Gogoi, Advocate for Respondent No.3 Mr. R. Dubey, S.C. ASEC for Rrespondent Nos.4 & 11 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR 18-02-2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.) This PIL petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the notifications dated 19.10.2024 issued by the Additional Chief Secretary, to the Government of Assam, Panchayat & Rural Development Department and Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, respectively, as well as the notification dated 13.11.2024 issued by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat & Rural Development (B) Department. The petitioners are essentially aggrieved by the action of delimiting/re-organising/renaming of Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block to Dudhnoi Development Block and Kushdhowa Anchalik Panchayat as Page No.# 7/9 Dudhnoi Anchalik Panchayat. The petitioners are also aggrieved with the inclusion of Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat into Dudhnoi Development Block. 2. The case as projected by the petitioners in the writ petition is that the Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block was constituted with a number of gaon panchayats, including Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat, which are inhabited mostly by the tribal (Bodo) people. It is contended that the Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block was constituted with the intention to address the tribal issues as well as to provide exclusive attention towards the tribal/indigenous people in order to protect the tribal population and to protect their rights as guaranteed under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India. It is also contended that the renaming of Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block as Dudhnoi Development Block and the inclusion of Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat in the Dudhnoi Development Block along with 12 numbers of gaon panchayats, which are mostly inhabited not only by the tribal people but by all sections of people, are going to seriously affect the rights of the tribal people of the Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat. It is further contended that the provisions contained in the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) notified by the Hon’ble Governor of Assam have also been violated by renaming the Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block as Dudhnoi Development Block. 3. Having gone through the PIL petition and after taking into consideration the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the petitioners have failed to make out a case for interference since the petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block, which was set up in the year 1991, consists of only those gaon panchayats which are mostly inhabited by the tribal people. No details with regard to the percentage of the tribal population in those gaon panchayats Page No.# 8/9 have been provided by the petitioners and, in absence of such details, it would be difficult to conclude that the Kushdhowa Tribal Development Block was set up in the year 1991 clubbing only those gaon panchayats wherein mostly tribal people inhabit. 4. A vague statement is made that the newly set up Dudhnoi Development Block, which consists of 12 number of gaon panchayats, is not inhabited only by the tribal people but the same is inhabited by all sections of people, without providing any population ratio of the tribal inhabitants and inhabitants of other sections. 5. It is also not elaborated as to how with the inclusion of Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat in the Dudhnoi Development Block, the rights of the tribal people residing in the Kushdhowa Gaon Panchayat are going to be adversely affected. 6. The petitioners have made a vague statement that the provisions of SOP are violated without pointing out that which provisions of SOP, in general or specific, are violated. It is also to be noticed that whatever the objections are raised on behalf of the petitioners in this PIL petition, have been raised after issuance of the final delimitation notification. 7. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that creation of new development block and fixing of the Headquarters thereof are purely administrative matters and the same exclusively come within the domain of the Executive. It is true that the High Court, while exercising the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can very well check the validity of the orders passed by the authorities delimiting the gaon panchayats, however, it has its own limitation and the delimitation process can Page No.# 9/9 only be interfered with if it is found to be manifestly arbitrary and irreconcilable to the constitutional values as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod vs. Union of Ondia and others, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1879. However, in the present case, the petitioners have failed to make out a case of manifest arbitrariness or violation of the constitutional values. 8. Hence, we do not find any merit in the challenge to the above-referred impugned notifications and hence, this PIL petition is dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant