Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010212582026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/372/2026 PARBINA YESMIN AND 3 ORS DAUGHTER OF ATAUR RAHMAN VILLAGE-DALGAON KHUTI, PO- DALGAON, PS-DALGAON, DISTRICT- DALGAON (ASSAM), PIN-784116 2: SAIJUDDIN AHMED SON OF OSMAN ALI VILLAGE- NO. 5 BARUAJHAR PS- DALGAON PO- CHAKRABASTI DISTRICT- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN- 784116 3: ABDUL WAHID SON OF AZIM UDDIN VILLAGE- KAHIBARI PS- DALGAON PO- JANGALPARA DISTRICT- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN- 784116 4: RANJU RAWSANARA BEGUM WIFE OF ABDUL HOQUE VILLAGE- JAMALPUR PO- DALGAON PS- DALGAON DISTRICT- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN- 78411 VERSUS DILOWARA BEGUM AND 13 ORS WIFE OF BAHARUL ISLAM VILLAGE-KAKALBHANGI JOGIGAON PO- DALGAON, PS-DALGAON DISTRICT-DARRANG (ASSAM), PIN-784116 Page No.# 2/7 2:NAZRUL ISLAM SON OF ABUL HUSSAIN VILLAGE-DOWAR PARA PS-DALGAON 3 PO-JANGALPARA DISTRICT-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 3:SAHNAJ PARBIN WIFE OF IBRAHIM ALI AHMED VILLAGE-KAKALBHANGI JOGIGAON PO- DALGAON PS-DALGAON DISTRICT-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 4:AKHTARA SARKAR WIFE OF ABDUR RAFIQUE VILLAGE-SARISABARI PS-DALGAON PO-JANGALPARA DISTRICT-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 5:MARJINA BEGUM WIFE OF ABDUR ROUF VILLAGE-BATABARI PS-DALGAON PO-CHAKRABASTI DISTRICT- ASSAM PIN-784116 6:SHAHNAZ BEGUM WIFE OF MANJUR HUSSAIN AHMED VILLAGE- NO.5 BARUAJHAR PS-DALGAON PO-CHAKRABASTI DISTRICT-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 7:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 8:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DARRANG DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784125 9:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD PO AND PS-MANGALDOI DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784125 Page No.# 3/7 10:THE CO-DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DALGAON CO-DISTRICT PO AND PS-DALGAON DIST- DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 11:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DALGAON REVENUE CIRCLE PO AND PS-DALGAON DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 12:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BECHIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT PO-BECHIMARI PS-DALGAON DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 13:THE SECRETARY 5 NO BARUAJHAR GAON PANCHAYAT VILLAGE-DALGAON KHUTI PO-DALGAON PS-DALGAON DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784116 14:AJIT KALITA ACS CO-DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DALGAON CO-DISTRICT DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78411 For the petitioner(s)/appellant(s):Mr. M.K. Hussain, Advocate Mr. A. Gautam, Advocate For the Respondent(s) :Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, Sr. Advocate Mr. A.M. Ahmed, Advocate Mr. S. Dutta, SC, P&RD Ms. U. Sharma, Jr. GA, Assam Page No.# 4/7 –B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 09.10.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. M.K. Hussain, learned Advocate for the appellants; and Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned senior Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 6; Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Assam, for respondents No. 7, 9, 12 and 13; and Ms. U. Sharma, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam, for respondents No. 8, 10 and 11. The judgment under challenge in the present appeal is dated 08.09.2026, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No. 3068/2026. In the Panchayat elections of Burajhar Gaon Panchayat in the district of Darrang, Assam, the appellants as well as the respondent No. 1 to 6 herein were elected as Ward Members. They took oath on 02.07.2025 and, in that meeting, the appellants got proposed and elected as the President and Vice- President of the said Gaon Panchayat. Since there was no other proposal for election of any other Members for the said posts, except the appellants, no formal election was held. Immediately thereafter, the respondents No. 1 to 6 questioned the election of the appellants as the President and Vice-President of the Gaon Panchayat on the ground that they had been made to sign the documents under coercion and threat. On the very day of the election of the appellants as the President and the Vice-President, a complaint was made by the respondents No. 1 to 6 before the District Commissioner, Darrang and, later, an appeal was also filed invoking Section 11 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1994”), seeking cancellation of the resolution declaring the appellants as President and Vice-President of the Panchayat. Page No.# 5/7 The District Commissioner, Darrang, had entrusted the matter to the Co- District Commissioner, Dalgaon, who passed a speaking order rejecting the allegation of the respondents No. 1 to 6 of being subjected to coercion, and upheld the election of the appellants as the office bearers. Thereafter, a writ petition came to be filed by the respondents No. 1 to 6, vide WP(C) No. 3068/2026, questioning the order passed by the Co-District Commissioner referred to above. This time, a wider complaint was raised by the respondents, namely, that the election of the appellants had not been conducted in accordance with Rule 46 (sub-Rules 4 to 6) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules of 1995”) and that the Co-District Commissioner had no jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Act of 1994 to decide the appeal. This could have been done only by the District Commissioner. Otherwise also, the earlier order passed by the Court also specifically directed the District Commissioner to decide the issue. The learned Single Judge, vide the impugned judgment has held that Section 11 of the Act of 1994 empowers only the Deputy Commissioner, who now is known as District Commissioner, to decide the validity of the election of President and Vice-President of a Gaon Panchayat. The Act itself does not define “District Commissioner”, but Rule 2(g) of the Rules of 1995 defines as “District Commissioner of a District”. The learned Single Judge also found that there was a specific direction in the earlier High Court order requiring the District Commissioner to decide the issue himself by adverting to the representation/appeal preferred by the respondents No. 1 to 6 and, therefore, the issue could not have been delegated to the Co-District Commissioner. It was also found out by the learned Single Judge that, apart from the delegation not being correct, the Co-District Commissioner did not at all address himself to the specific allegations made by the respondents No. 1 to 6. Page No.# 6/7 Thus, on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the Co-District Commissioner to decide the issue, the order passed by the Co-District Commissioner was set aside and the District Commissioner, Darrang, was directed to appoint an authorised officer to conduct fresh election of the President and Vice-President of the concerned Gaon Panchayat, strictly in accordance with Rule 46 of the Rules of 1995. The entire exercise was directed to be completed within a period of 30 days of the service of a certified copy of the judgment. By the impugned judgment, it was also directed that the fresh election shall be held in the office of the Executive Officer of Bechimari Anchalik Panchayat and that pending the fresh elections, all financial decision of the Gaon Panchayat would be taken only with the concurrence of the Co-District Commissioner, Dalgaon. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the definition of “District Commissioner” also includes a Co-District Commissioner, or another officer and, therefore, the insistence on the issue being decided by the District Commissioner only is not in accord with the provisions of the Act. That apart, by the impugned judgment, the District Commissioner has been asked to appoint an authorised officer to conduct a fresh election. In that view of the matter, since there has been a direction to conduct fresh election in the office of the Executive Officer, Bechimari Anchalik Panchayat, under the supervision of an officer authorised by the District Commissioner, we are of the view that interest of the Gaon Panchayat in question and its continuity shall be better subserved if we uphold the judgment of the learned Single Judge in its entirety, without going into the question of wrong delegation. Since the parties are not aware whether the District Commissioner concerned was made known of the judgment as also the directions issued by the learned Single Judge, we direct the appellants to immediately furnish a Page No.# 7/7 certified copy of the judgment impugned in the present appeal, to the District Commissioner, Darrang, who shall appoint/authorise an officer to conduct fresh election, if not already done, as directed by the learned Single Judge, within a period of 30 (thirty) days, to be counted from today. We endorse and reiterate the directions that pending the fresh election, all financial decision of the Panchayat will be taken by the appellants only with the concurrence of the Co-District Commissioner, Dalgaon. This appeal stands disposed off with the afore-noted observations and directions. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant