PANTI GONGPOU Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TAMENGLONG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Civil Rule, the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 13.5.85 (Annexure-A\2) and the order dated 25.2.88 (Annexure-A/6) passed by the respondent No. 1

(2.) We have heard Mr. A. Nilamani Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. H.N.K. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. L. Shyam Kishore Singh, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1, 3, 4 and 5.

(3.) The facts leading to the filing of the present petition may be summerily recited. The petitioner was Khullakpa (Chief) of Taosang Village. The office of the Khullakpa of the hill village is hereditary. By virtue of the petitioner being Khullakpa, he became the ex-officio Chairman of the Village under sub-section 4\ of Section 3 of the Manipur (Village Authority in Hill Areas) Act, 1956 (hereinafter the Act), in election of the members of the Village authorities held sometime on 1.12.1983 in terms of the provisions of Section 7 of the Act. the the said election other members of the Village Authorities were also elected as members including the respondent No. 2. The first meeting of the Village authority was held sometime in the beginning of 1984. The term of office of the elected members u/s 6 of the Act is for a period of 3 (three) years from the date appointed for its first meeting. Therefore, the term of the office of the other elected members was to expire sometime in 1987. The petitioner was, however, informed that by the impugned order dated 13.5.85, the first respondent has passed an order approving the election of the 2nd respondent as Chairman of Taushang village authority on the ground that the petitioner, Khulakpa of the village is unwilling to act as a Chairman of the Village authority due to old age. On enquiry the petitioner came to know that the S.D.O/Nungba had submitted a report to the respondent No. 1 on the basis of a concocted report of the S.D.O. Khoupum stating, inter alia, that the petitionen tendered his resignation from the Chairmanship of Taoshang Village and Village authority nominated the respondent No. 2 as the Chairman in place of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No. 2 in collusion with other elected members practised fraud upon the petitioner by obtaining the signature of the petitioner on some piece of paper by misrepresentation of facts that they were filing a representation to the S.D.O/Nurgba for holding fresh election as required by the provision of the Act and Rules made thereunder. The petitioner being an unsophesticated tribal put his signature bonafide without knowing the contents. However, later on it came to reveal that the same was used as the petitioner agreeing to resign from his office as-Ex- officio Chairman and nomination of the respondent No. 2 as Chairman of the Village Authority. On coming to know of this fact., the petitioner filed a representation before the learned Dy. Commissioner (Respondent No.1). The respondent No. 1, thereafter, registered a complaint as No. DC/TML/15/1/ 86. The learned Dy. Commissioner by its order data 20.10.87 was of the opinion that the declaration of the respondent No.2 as Chief of Taoshang Village was in contravention of the existing Act. By the aforesaid order, the learned Dy. Commissioner also directed the respondent No. 2 to prove the legitimacy of his claim as Chairman by producing material evidence within thirty days, failing which the complaint of the petitioner will be made absolute. It may be pertinent to mention herein that in his complaint petition, the petitioner claimed that by virtue of he being the Khullakpa, became the ex-officio Chairman under sub-section 4 of Section 3 of the Act. We shall be dealing with this provision at the appropriate time. However, by another order dated 25.2.88 (Annexure-A/6) the learned Dy. 'Commissioner was of the opinion that he is not competent to set aside the order passed by his predecessor and status quo will be maintained until and unless the order is revoked/quashed by the Civil Court. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned orders this writ petition has been preferred.