Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010158822026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4056/2026 ATAUR RAHMAN CHOUDHURY AND ANR S/O- GASIBAR RAHMAN CHOUDHURY, WARD MEMBER, ABHAYPUKHURI GAON PANCHAYAT, WARD NO.9, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RAJAPUKHURI BAGICHA, P.O.- CHAMUAKHAT, P.S.- DHULA, DISTRICT- DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784190 2: SHAJAHAN ALI SON OF JAFAR ALI MEMBER PUB-MANGALDAI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT NO.46 ABHAYPUKHURI GAON PANCHAYAT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RAJAPUKHURI BAGICHA P.O.- CHAMUAKHAT P.S.- DHULA DISTRICT- DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78419 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM, PANJABARI JURIPAR, GUWAHATI-37 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD MANGALDAI DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 4:THE ACCOUNTANT DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD MANGALDAI, DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DARRANG DIST.- DARANG ASSAM 6:GAJEN SARMA PEON, DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD MANGALDAI, DIST.- DARRANG ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A SARMA, MR. M HUSSAIN,MR H MAZUMDER,MR. W RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P AND R.D. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 31.07.2026 Heard Shri A. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD. The petitioner no. 1 is a Member of the Abhaypukhuri Gaon Panchayat whereas the petitioner no. 2 is a Member of the Pub-Mangaldai Anchalik Panchayat. It has been contended that so far as the Ambachowk Cattle Market is concerned, for the last 5 years, the settlement amount being less than Rs.5,00,000/- the concerned Gaon Panchayat had issued the settlement orders. However, vide the impugned order dated 01.07.2026, the Darrang Zilla Parishad has authorised its Peon to collect the tolls. The learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court Page No.# 3/3 to the Executive Order dated 21.05.2025 more specifically Clause 7 thereof as per which, in case of failure in settlement, the assets will be managed as per decision of the next higher body. He has submitted that though settlement has not been done, the present arrangement would be in violation of the aforesaid Executive Order. Shri Dutta, the learned Standing Counsel has however submitted that the Executive Order would not apply inasmuch as there is no failure per se in making the settlement and only because of a new mode being adopted, there has been certain delay. He has also raised a pertinent point that neither the concerned Gaon Panchayat nor the concerned Anchalik Panchayat are aggrieved and only two members of the respective Panchayats are before this Court. Shri Sarma, the learned counsel in his response has submitted that the petitioners have been duly authorised by resolutions taken by the respective Standing Committees. While the resolutions by the Standing Committee are not put to doubt, the requirement of law is that the aggrieved person/legal entity should approach the Court. At this stage, Shri Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty that the concerned Gaon Panchayat/Anchalik Panchayat would approach this Court. In view of such submission, the writ petition is closed by giving liberty, as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant