Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010121342026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3197/2026 SAIF UDDIN AHMED S/O- ZINNAT ALI, REPRESENTING THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF 37 NO. GUILEZA GAON PANCHAYAT, RESIDENT OF-VILLAGE- GUILEZA, P.O- CHARCHARIA, P.S.- KALGACHIA IN THE DISTRICT OF BARPETA ASSAM, PIN-781319. VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, PIN-781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER - CUM - DISTRICT PROGRAMME COORDINATOR (MGNREGA) OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301. 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - CUM - PROJECT DIRECTOR BARPETA ZILA PARISHAD BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 PIN- 781301. 5:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER (BDO) GHILAJHARI- RUPSHI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK ITERVITA HOWLY-781316 DISTRICT-BARPETA ASSAM. 6:NURUL AMIN S/O. LT. MAJIBAR RAHMAN VILLAGE- GUILEZA P.O-CHARCHARIA PS.-KALGACHIA BARPETA ASSAM GRAM ROZGAR SAHAYAK (GRS) ATTACHED TO 37 NO. GUILEZA GAON PANCHAYAT BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781319 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G JALAN, I KUMARI,MS. D SARMA,S FAZIL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P AND R.D. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 19.06. 2026 Heard Mr. G. Jalan learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. K. Ghosh, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a resident of Guileza Gaon Panchayat, under Ghilahari-Rupshi Development Block, Itervita, Howly, Barpeta. The petitioner is before this Court due to non redressal of his grievances, which Page No.# 3/4 were ventilated by way of representations before the concerned authorities, namely Block Development Officer, Ghilajhari-Rupsi Development Block, the Chief Executive Officer, Barpeta Zila Parishad, Barpeta, the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta District and the Director and Commissioner Panchayat and Rural Development, Assam. The basic grievance of the petitioner is that the private respondent No. 6, who was appointed as a Gram Rozgar Sahayak in addition to his regular duty as Gram Rozgar Sahayak, in Haldhiya, Tengagaon Gaon Panchayat, while the spouse of the Respondent No. 6 is supervising elected authority and serving as Working/Ward member of Ward No. 1 of the Guileza Gaon Panchayat. It is further submitted by the petitioner that this has happened because of nepotism and the Gaon Panchayat members apprehend serious financial malpractices. However, the representations which were preferred by the petitioner in that regard have not been redressed. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by a resolution adopted by the Guileza Gaon Panchayat, the petitioner has been authorized to file the present writ petition on behalf of its members. It is further submitted that a Special Emergency Public Meeting of 37 No. Guileza Gaon Panchayat, held its meeting on 14.05.2026 and by the 5th resolution, the petitioner has been selected or appointed as a representative on behalf of the common people and has given him the responsibility for filing the case or taking any other legal action. Therefore, this present writ petition has been filed. 4. The only limited prayer before the Court is seeking a direction to the Respondent Authorities to consider the representation filed by the petitioner and Page No.# 4/4 dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. 5. Mr. A. K. Ghosh, learned Standing Counsel, PNRD, does not object to the prayer made. 6. The learned counsel for the parties has been heard, the pleadings available on case record have been carefully perused. 7. Considering the submissions made and upon perusal of the pleadings available on record, this Court considers it appropriate to direct the Commissioner to dispose of the representation stated to be pending before the Respondent Authorities, which is filed by the petitioner. The Respondent No. 2, the Commissioner will examine the claims made by the petitioner and thereafter pass a speaking order on the claims. 8. Let this exercise be done within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition in terms of the above stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant