PALATANA GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Gram Panchayats and Mr. G. S. Bhattacharji, learned State counsel for the respondents. All the writ petitions are set up in the resembling facts and attended by identical questions of law and, as such, those are tied up together for disposal by a common judgment.

(2.) It appears from the writ petitions that the Gram Panchayats, the petitioners, were kept in the dark while preparing the list of beneficiaries under the Indira Awaas Yojana (the IAY in short), a Central Government Scheme for construction of houses at the rate of Rs. 48,500/- for the beneficiaries. It has been contended by the writ petitioners that in terms of the Sub-rule 10, 14, 15, 16 and 17 of the Tripura Panchayats (Administration) Rules, 1994 the Gram Sansad are the authorities to finalize the list of such beneficiaries for the said scheme. But the respondent No. 3, the Block Development Officer, Kakrabon R.D. Block by the work order No. F.10 (5-C)/BDO/KBN/IAY/2011-2012/5275 dated 16.03.2012 has released fund for construction of IAY (Model-VI) houses during the year 2011-12 in favour of three beneficiaries each for Palatana Gram Panchayat and Jamjuri Gram Panchayat and for six beneficiaries for Purba Palatana Gram Panchayat. The said work orders are impugned in these writ petitions on the ground that the selection of the beneficiaries has been carried in defiance of the provisions as engrafted in the Tripura Panchayats (Administration) Rules, 1994 as well as the guidelines issued for implementation of the IAY by the Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development.

(3.) The sub-rule 10 of Rule 17 of Tripura Panchayats (Administration) Rules, 1994 provides as follows: