(1.) The Civil Rules Nos. 1551 of 1989 and 1695 of 1989 can be disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is thus. He filed an application before the Chief Executive Member of the Karbi Anglong District Council, "Council" for short, for settlement of a Green Wood Coupe. The Council settled Hembari Green Wood Coupe No. 3 of 1988-89 with him under letter dated 8-6-88. On the direction of the Divisional Forest Officer under his letter dated 24-1-89, the petitioner deposited the security money of Rs. 8,495.00 and first kist money of Rupees 42,489/- within the stipulated time. There-after, on 25-1-89, the petitioner entered into a contract with respondent-3, the Principal Secretary of the Council, for operation of the forest. In spite of the deposit of security and kist money, the respondents have not issued the work order to enable the petitioner to operate the coupe. The petitioner has, there-fore, filed Civil Rule No. 1551 of 1989 in this Court for a direction to allow the petitioner to operate the Green Wood Coupe No. 3 of 1988-89. While the writ petition was pending, the settlement of the forest coupe with the peti-tioner has been cancelled, vide, letter dated 23-9-89 of the Secretary, Executive Com-mittee of the Council. The grounds for cancellation are as follows. The settlement was made without following any procedure, and without ascertaining the availability of the matured trees in the coupe in question. Many a complaint has been received from the public that the general public do not get any opportunity to compete in the process of settlement as it was not sold by auction. The Range Forest Officer at Silonijan by his letter dated 24-1-89 informed that there is no area in Kalapahar for operation of the coupe as settled with the petitioner. The agreement has not been executed for operation of the coupe. In compliance with the Government letter dated 30-3-84 from the Special Secretary to the Government of Assam, the coupe under reference was to be put to sale by notification. In the letter it is also mentioned that the petitioner shall be informed about the pro-posed public sale and the Council shall take into consideration the case of the petitioner as he has incurred some loss.
(3.) The case of the respondents, in short, is that from the report dated 24-1-89 of the Range Officer, Silonijan, it appears that there was no area in Kalapahar for settlement of a coupe. Pre-marking of trees available for settlement was not done before the issuance of the notice dated 8-6-88 for settling the coupe with the petitioner. The settlement order was issued by the Council in violation of the provisions of the Assam Sale of Forest Produce, Coupes and Mahals Rules, 1977, "Rules" for short. The settlement was not made by inviting tender or by public auction. If the settlement on the basis of the said letter was permitted to be made there would be a loss of about Rs. 5.00 lac. No tree was available for settlement of a coupe in Kala-pahar area and as such the letter dated 8-6-88 has not been executed for enforcement of a lease. It would not have been in public interest to settle the coupe in terms of the letter dated 8-6-88. The decision to cancel the settlement was taken by the Council, but not by the Secretary.