JOY DEV DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common judgment and order, I propose to dispose of these five writ petitions, namely, WP(C) Nos. 555/2008, 841/2008, 1779/2008, 1789/2008 and 3020/2008 and also Misc. Case No. 1765/2008, inasmuch as all the writ petitions and the said miscellaneous case are closely interlinked with each other and decision, in any of these writ petitions, would have a bearing on the outcome of the remaining writ petitions.

(2.) I have heard Mr. D. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) Nos. 555/2008, 841/2008 and 1779/2008, and Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing on behalf of the State respondents. I have also heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel, appearing, on behalf of the private respondent in WP(C) Nos. 555/2008, 841/2008 and 1779/2008 aforementioned and, on behalf of the petitioner, in WP(C) Nos. 1789/2008 and 3020/2008, the petitioner, in WP(C) Nos. 1789/08 and 3020/2008, being the private respondent in the remaining writ petitions as mentioned hereinbefore.

(3.) MR . D. Das, learned Counsel for the tenderer, namely, Joydev Das, has submitted that under the provisions of Rule 17 of the said Rules, if a tenderer fails, inter alia, to pay any of the installments within due date, it is obligatory, on the part of the State, to cancel the sale of the mahal and the mahal shall, then, be re -sold for the remaining part of the settlement period at the risk of the person, who had been granted the settlement. There is, contends Mr. D. Das, no provision, in the said Rules, empowering the State Government to grant extension of time for payment of installments. In such circumstances, the Government, according to Mr. Das, has no discretion to extend the period of deposit of installments.