GARGANARAYAN BARMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application the Petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing cancellation of a notice issued by the State of Assam under the Assam Rural Panchayat Act 1948 and also for a writ of quo warranto against the Respondent No. 4 preventing him from functioning as the President of the Uttar Bajali Mauza Rural Panchayat.

(2.) THE Petitioner is a voter in the Uttar Bajali Mauza Rural Panchayat and he was elected a member to the aforesaid Panchayat by the Nityananda Primary Panchayat in the said Mauza. This Uttar Bajali Mauza Rural Panchayat was constituted under Government notification dated the 10th March, 1953 in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Assam Rural Panchayat Act 1948 (Assam Act XXVII of 1948). The Panchayat in question comprised of 20 villages, one of the villages specified in the notification being 'Pathsala town.' In pursuance of the said notification the Sub -Divisional Officer of Barpeta issued another notification dated 24th March, 1953 by which he declared the format on of five Primary Panchayats in the Uttar Bajali Mauza Rural Panchayat in exercise of the powers confirmed by Section 4(1) and (2) of the Act in question as amended by Section 3 of the Assam Act XVII of 1952.

(3.) THAT the land in question does not fall under the first category is not disputed. But the contention of the learned Counsel is that it may fall under the second and the third categories. Now, so far as the second category is concerned, it refers to an area notified under the Assam Municipal Act. Reference in this connection may be made to Section 328 of the Assam Municipal Act which provides amongst others that the State Government may by notification, signify its intention to declare that with respect to some or all of the matters upon which a municipal fund may be expended, improved arrangements are required within a specified area, which, nevertheless, it is not expedient to constitute as a municipality.