NARAYAN DAS Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 20 -7 -68 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang, by which the order dated 14 -7 -68 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Darrang, appointing the Petitioner a Gaonbura of village Chengelimora in the Barbhagia Mouza in place of Bangshidhar Das Gaonbura, Respondent No. 4, has been set aside.

(2.) THE Petitioner's case is that respond dent no. 4 Bangshidhar Das was the Gaonbura of Chengelimora village who filed a petition on 6 -5 -67 before the Sub -Deputy Collector of Naduar Circle through the Mouzadar of Barbhagia Mouza stating inter alia that he had become unable toad; as gaonbura and as such the said post might be offered to his eldest son, Liladhar Das and therefore the Petitioner filed' a petition on 18 -5 -67 before the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang, praying for his appointment as gaonbura of Chengelimora village in place of the gaonbura who was retire from service. On 3 -7 -67 the Petitioner filed another petition before the Deputy Commissioner of Darrang alleging alia that Liladhar Das, the son of Respondent no. 4, was a minor and that the people in the locality filed a petition praying for the appointment of the Petitioner as the gaonbura. This petition was sent to the Sub -Deputy Collector, Naduar Circle for enquiry and report. Thereafter the Sub -Deputy Collector made necessary enquiry and submitted his report to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, who by his order dated 14 -7 -67 relieved Respondent no. 4 from the office of the Gaonbura of Chengelimora village and appointed the Petitioner as the new gaonbura and accordingly a sanad was issued to the Petitioner by the Additional Deputy Commissioner. The Petitioner was performing the duties of gaonbura since the date of his appointment. Thereafter he was served with a copy of the order dated 20 -7 -68' passed by the Deputy Commissioner whereby the order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner appointing the Petitioner as gaonbura accepting the resignation of Respondent no. 4 and relieving him from the said office was cancelled and gaon -buraship of Respondent no. 4 was restored. The Petitioner has challenged this order of the Deputy Commissioner,

(3.) MR . A. M. Majumdar, the learned Junior Government Advocate, on the other hand, submitted that the appointment of a gaonbura was made by the Deputy Commissioner under Executive Instructions 162 and 163 and this was not made under any provision of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, that in appointing a gaonbura the executive power of the State Government was exercised by the Deputy Commissioner as delegated under Executive Instructions 162 and 103 and as such the appointment of the Petitioner by the Additional Deputy Commissioner was without jurisdiction and it was no appointment in the eye of law and the Petitioner could not be said to hold the post under the State Government inasmuch as he was not appointed by any authority on whom the executive power of the State Government regarding the appointment of gaonbura was vested. On that basis, the learned Junior Government Advocate submitted that the Petitioner was not entitled to any protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India.