SOMNATH DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner herein impugns the Government order in Memo No. PDA. 135/8/12 dated 4 -7 -80 allowing the Panchayat appeal of respondent No. 6, Baliram Nath and remanding the case to the Nowgong Mahkuma Parishad, meanwhile staying the operation of the impugned settlement order, and the order in Memo No. PDA 135/80/28 dated 8 -9 -80 dismissing the petitioner's appeal petition dated 25 -7 -80 against the order dated 5 -7 -80 settling the Jamunamukh Weekly Bazar with respondent No. 5, and also the fresh sale notice in Memo No. N. M. P. 557/80 dated 18 -9 -80 for settlement of the same bazar.

(2.) PURSUANT to the sale notice dated 3 -4 -80 issued by the Chief Executive Councillor, Mahkuma Parishad. Nowgong inviting tenders in respect of Jamunamukh Weekly Bazar for the period from 30 -6 -80 to 30 -6 -81 of the five tenders, the petitioner submitted tender offering Rs. 2151/ -, while respondent No. 5 Md. Abdul Haque Laskar offered Rs. 5051/ - and respondent No. 6 Rupees 2551/ -. The Executive Committee of the Mahkuma Parishad validly ac - cepted the petitioner's tender and the Secretary of the Parishad sent the letter of acceptance to the petitioner vide Memo No. L. M. P. 557/80 dated 23 -6 -80 and asked him to deposit the first kist money and to complete the other formalities, as per Rule 28 (6) of the Panchayati Rai (Administrative) Rules and Clause 5 of the Tender Notice. The Petitioner complied and deposited the first kist of Rs. 6453/ - only by chalan No. 5433 dated 25 -6 -80 and also ex ecuted the lease deed, whereafter he was delivered possession of the bazar on 1 -7 -80. It appears that respondent No. 6, Baliram Nath preferred an appeal and on perusal thereof and hearing his Advocate, the respondent No. 2 Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat and C. D. (A) Branch by his order in Memo No. PDA. 136/80/12 dated 4 -7 -80, purported to be passed under Section 138(2) of the Assam Panchayati Raj Act, 1972, hereinafter called 'the Act', remanded the case to the Mahkuma Parishad for reconsideration and give valid reasons and meanwhile stayed the operation of the impugned settlement order till the matter was reconsidered and the decision confirmed by the general body of the Mahkuma Pari shad. The order was communicated to the Chief Executive Councillor by a telegram No. PDA. 135/80/11 (Annexure B -l), who in his turn by the impugned order in Memo No. N. M. P. 563/80/10207 dated 4 -7 -80 (Annexure B) communicated the same to the petitioner and for bade him to manage the bazar. Though the direction, on remand, was for reconsideration, because the reasons given earlier were not adequate, the Executive Committee by its order dated 5 -7 -80 settled the bazar with respondent No. 5, Md. Abdul Hague Laskar at his bid of Rs. 5051/ -. Against that order the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 138(b)(2) read with Section 133 of the Act which the respondent No. 2 dismissed, vide order No. PDA 135/80/28 dated 8 -9 -80 holding that both the respondent No. 6 and the petitioner would have their turn to get the offer in pursuance of the Government order dated 20 -6 -80 and Assam Panchayati Raj (Administrative) Rule 1973, Rule 28 Sub -rule (6) and the petitioner's grievance has not yet arisen. Hence this petition. It may be noted that what were the contents of the aforesaid order dated 20 -6 -80 is not known. It can, however, be inferred that this order was for issue of fresh tenders. The petitioner states that he was not served with that order.

(3.) THIS Court, while issuing Rule on 1 -10 -80 stayed the operation of the impugned orders dated 4 -7 -80, 8 -9 -80 and 18 -9 -80. The petitioner states that by virtue of the said stay order he is still in possession of the bazar.