FERDAUS RAHMAN MAZUMDER Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners in the instant batch of writ petitions. Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Standing Counsel of the Panchayat and Rural Development Department who appears for the said Department and Mr. J. Handique, the learned Government Advocate who appears on behalf of the District Administration. I have also heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the private respondents and Mr. R. Dubey, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the Assam State Election Commission.

(2.) It is contended before this Court by the learned counsels for the respondents that the issue involved in the present batch of writ petitions is covered by the decision rendered in the judgment and order dtd. 23/2/2026 in the case of Aysha Khatun Vs. State of Assam and Ors. in 2026(3) GLT 102: WP (C) No. 7351/2025, reported in 2026: GAU-AS:2734.

(3.) At the outset, it is relevant to observe that the present batch of writ petitions can be divided into two sets. One set of writ petitions pertains to inaction on the part of the concerned District Commissioner in taking action pursuant to information provided by way of representations that the returned candidate cannot be permitted to remain as a Member of the concerned Panchayat as he/she was disqualified under Sec. 111 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act of 1994') read with Rule 62 of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995 (for short, 'the Rules of 1995'). This set of writ petitions are hereinafter referred to as 'the first set of writ petitions'.