HATEM ALI Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the Opposite party not to give effect to the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Nowgong, dated the 11th April 1962.

(2.) THERE is a bazar, known as Rupahihat bazar, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Rupahi Anchalik Panchayat. This bazar was put up for auction on the 3rd March 1962, by the Rupahi Anchalik Panchayat for settlement for the year 1962 -63. The auction was conducted by the President of the Anchalik Panchayat at the Panchayat's office on the same date assisted by the Executive Officer and five other members of the Panchayat including the Vice -President. A number of persons offered bid of Rs. 5,650/ - and the President accepted the bid of Hatem Ali and did not accept the bid of other bidders who had also offered the same bid. The Deputy Commissioner by his impugned order has set aside the order of the President accepting the bid of the Petitioner and has directed that the bazar should be re -auctioned.

(3.) BEFORE we deal with the merits of the case it will be convenient to dispose of the preliminary objection raised by the opposite party. It is con tended by Dr. Medhi, who appears for some of the opposite parties, that as the Petitioner has no right to get settlement of the bazar and the settlement itself is not complete so far without the approval of the Panchayat in its meeting, the Petitioner has no right in the bazar itself and thus his application under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. His argument in substance is that under Article 226 of the Constitution a person can ask for enforcement of his right and if the Petitioner has no right he is not entitled to ask for any writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. Reliance is placed for this proposition on the, cases of Stale of Orissa v. Madan Gopal Rungta reported in : AIR 1952 SC 12, Bombay Salt and Chemical Industries v. L.J. Johnson, reported in : AIR 1958 SC 289 and Assam Fisheries Fanms and Industries Ltd. v. Development Commissioner, Assam, reported in : AIR 1953 Gau 155.