Hasina Begum and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC010193152025

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:1394

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/5176/2025

¶6

HASINA BEGUM AND 5 ORS. (WARD MEMBER, WARD NO. 3, 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT), W/O SHAHA ALOM AHMED, VILL- SIMULUGURI, P.O.- GOLANDI, P.S.DALGAON, DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM), PIN-784115

¶7

2: RUKIA BEGUM (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 10 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) W/O HAJIBUR RAHMAN VILL- CHUKABAHI P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784115

¶8

3: MAHIRAN NESSA (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 7 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) W/O ZAMAL UDDIN VILL- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784115

¶9

4: MURSHIDA KHATUN (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 6 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) W/O ASHINUR RAHMAN VILL- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784115

¶10

Page No.# 2/8

¶11

5: RAFIQQUL ISLAM (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 4 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) S/O ABDUS SALAM VILL- SIMULUGURI P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784115 6: CHAND MOHAMMAD (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 9 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) S/O LATE AKKABAR ALI VILL- CHUKABAHI P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-78411

¶12

VERSUS

¶13

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 10 ORS.

¶14

REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶15

2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DARRANG P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784125

¶16

3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784125

¶17

4:THE CO-DISTRICT COMMISISONER DALGAON CO-DISTRICT P.O. AND P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784116

¶18

5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DALGAON REVENUE CIRCLE

¶19

Page No.# 3/8

¶20

P.O. AND P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784116 6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BECHIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O.- BECHIMARI P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784116 7:THE SECRETARY 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT VILL- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784115 8:KUMAR UDDIN AHMED (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 2 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) S/O LATE MAFAZZAL PARAMANIK VILL- NO. 1 MAJGAON P.O.- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784514 9:BANESHA KHATUN (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 8 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) W/O JAHUR UDDIN VILL- DAIPAM P.O.- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784514 10:ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 5 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) S/O ABDUL SALAM VILL- DAIPAM P.O.- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON

¶21

Page No.# 4/8

¶22

DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-784514 11:NILIMA KHATUN (WARD MEMBER WARD NO. 1 74 NO. DAIPAM GAON PANCHAYAT) W/O NAZRUL ISLAM VILL- NO. 1 MAJGAON P.O.- DAIPAM P.S.- DALGAON DIST- DARRANG (ASSAM) PIN-78454

¶23

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, B DAS,P. GHOSH,MR. A M AHMED

¶24

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., MR A HAWARI, (FOR CAVEATOR R-8),FOR CAVEATOR,MR S ISLAM, (FOR CAVEATOR R-8),GA, ASSAM

¶25

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Date : 04.02.2026

¶28

Heard Mr. A.M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7, being the authorities in P&RD; Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5; and Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8.

¶29

In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for (i) setting aside and quashing the first meeting held on 10.07.2025, of 74 No. Daipam Gaon Panchayat, whereby the respondent No. 8 was declared as the President in an illegal and arbitrary manner; (ii) to direct the respondent No. 2 to cancel, withdraw and/or forebear from giving effect to the first meeting dated 10.07.2025, whereby the respondent No. 8 was declared

¶30

Page No.# 5/8

¶31

illegally as the President in total violation of Rule 46 (6) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitutional) Rules, 1995 (As Amended); (iii) to direct the respondent No. 2 to hold the first meeting afresh for selection/election for the posts of President and Vice-President of 74 No. Daipam Gaon Panchayat; and (iv) to direct the respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representations dated 10.07.2025 and 28.07.2025, in a time bound manner.

¶32

The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under:

¶33

“The petitioners, namely, Hasina Begum, Rukia Begum, Mahiran Nessa, Murshida Khatun, Rafiqul Islam and Chand Mohammad, and the respondent Nos. 8, 9, 10 and 11, namely, Kumar Uddin Ahmed, Banesha Khatun, Abu Bakkar Siddique and Nilima Khatun, respectively are the elected Ward Members of 74 No. Daipam Gaon Panchayat in the district of Darrang. The District Commissioner, Darrang/respondent No. 2 convened the first meeting of elected Ward Members on 21.06.2025 and authorized the Co-District Commissioner, Dalgaon Co-District/respondent No. 4, to preside over the first meeting. Thereafter, on 21.06.2025, the meeting of the elected Ward Members of the G.P. was deferred without any reason. Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 had issued notice dated 26.06.2025, convening the first meeting on 02.07.2025, which was presided over by the respondent No. 4. In the first meeting, all elected Ward Members were present and the Authorized Officer had administered the oath to the 4 elected Ward Members only, and the first meeting was postponed to 10.07.2025. The Authorized Officer then administered the oath and took signatures in the proceeding book in the first meeting on 10.07.2025, and proceeded for selection/election of the President and Vice President of 74

¶34

Page No.# 6/8

¶35

No. Daipam Gaon Panchayat.

¶36

Thereafter, the petitioner No. 6 (Chand Mohammad) had proposed the name of petitioner No. 1 (Hasina Begum) and the respondent No. 10 (Abu Bakkar Siddique) proposed the name of the respondent No. 8 (Kumar Uddin) for the post of President. The petitioner No. 5 (Rofiqul Islam) proposed the name of petitioner No. 2 (Rukiya Begum) and the respondent No. 10 (Abu Bakkar Siddique Ahmed) proposed the name of respondent No. 9 (Banesa Khatun) for the post of Vice-President.

¶37

Thereafter, the respondent No. 4 decided to hold election and in the election, the petitioners, i.e. six Ward Members had casted votes in favour of Hasina Begum and Rukiya Begum (petitioner Nos. 1 and 2) for the posts of President and Vice-President. On the other hand, the remaining four Ward Members had casted votes in favour of Kumar Uddin Ahmed and Banesa Khatun (respondent Nos. 8 and 9) for the posts of President and Vice-President, respectively. But, surprisingly, the respondent No. 4, illegally and arbitrarily, had declared that the respondent No. 8 secured 6 votes and declared him as President, in total violation of Rule 46 (6) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitutional) Rules, 1995 (As Amended).

¶38

Thereafter, the petitioners had submitted representations on 10.07.2025 and 28.07.2025, to the respondent No. 2, but the same failed to evoke any response, instead he had forwarded the same to the respondent No. 4, who is not the authorized person, and also facilitated the respondent No. 8 to function as the President.

¶39

Being aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present petition.”

¶40

Page No.# 7/8

¶41

Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that to ventilate the grievance of the petitioners, they have filed two representations, one on 10.07.2025 and another on 28.07.2025, and that the present petition may be disposed of by directing the respondent No. 2, to dispose of the representations filed by the petitioners on 10.07.2025 and 28.07.2025, which are being enclosed with the present petition at page Nos. 44 and 48, respectively, after affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties in a time bound manner. Mr. Ahmed has also referred to a decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 3666/2025 , wherein vide judgment and order dated 11.12.2025, similar direction was issued to the District Commissioner, Darrang to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioners therein, and that similar direction may be passed in the present petition also.

¶42

Mr. Dutta, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7, being the authorities in P&RD; Mr. Roy, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5; and Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8 submit that they have no objection in the event of disposing of the present petition by directing the respondent No. 2/District Commissioner, Darrang to dispose of the representations dated 10.07.2025 and 28.07.2025, filed by the petitioners of the present petition, in a time bound manner.

¶43

Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has gone through the petition and the documents placed on record, and also perused the judgment and order dated 11.12.2025, passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 3666/2025 .

¶44

In view of the facts projected in the present petition and also in view of the fact that two representation filed by the petitioners are yet to be disposed of

¶45

Page No.# 8/8

¶46

by the respondent No. 2/District Commissioner, Darrang, and as agreed upon by learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present petition by directing the respondent No. 2/ District Commissioner, Darrang, to dispose of the representations dated 10.07.2025 and 28.07.2025, filed by the petitioners, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties, by a speaking order.

¶47

The petitioners shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent No. 2 within a period of three working days from today.

¶48

In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶49

JUDGE

¶50

Comparing Assistant

Hasina Begum and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasina Begum and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajib Chandra Dutta Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Joynal Hoque Prodhani and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Hiten Chandra Patgiri and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ms N Chetia and Sons Trading and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

M Tec Innovations Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Narayan Konwar, IAS Vs Smti Rubi Goswami