[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Sahajal Haque Village-Na Adavati ... vs Burhan Ali And 13 Ors on 18 December, 2025
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010280432025
2025:GAU-
AS:17586-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/411/2025
SRI DIGANTA SAIKIA AND 3 ORS
MEMBER, WARD NO.1 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT
SON OF LATE SONARAM SAIKIA VILL-GHILADHARI MUKH, PO-
TEWARIPAL PS-SOOTEA, DIST-BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784175 MOBIL-
9101757387
2: RAJIV MISRA
MEMBER
WARD NO.2 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT SON OF
KHAGEN MISHRA VILLAGE-ADABHETI
PO-TEWARIPAL PS-SOOTEA
DIST-BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784175
MOBILE-9101787472
3: GAHUR ALI
MEMBER
WARD NO.3 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT SON OF
ABDUL RAHIM VILLAGE-NO.2 ADAVETI
PO-TEWARIPAL PS-SOOTEA
DIST-BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784175
MOBILE-7663002425
4: SAMSUL ISLAM
MEMBER
WARD NO.7 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT SON OF
SAHAJAL HAQUE VILLAGE-NA ADAVATI KALAKATI NO.1 PO-TEWARIPAL
PS-SOOTEA
DISTRICTBISWANATH ASSAM
PIN-784175 MOBILE-910108663
VERSUS
BURHAN ALI AND 13 ORS
Page No.# 2/6
MEMBER, WARD NO.9 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT
SON OF MD. ABDUL KADER VILLAGE-KALAKATI, PO-TEWARIPAL PS-
SOOTEA, DISTRICT-BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN-784175
2:MOFIDA KHATUN
MEMBER
WARD NO.6 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT WIFE OF
ABDUL KASEM VILLAGE-BAKRRAPATTA
PO-BAKRRAPATTA PS-SOOTEA
DISTRICT-BISWANATH
ASSAM, PIN-784175
3:HASINA KHATUN
MEMBER
WARD NO.4 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT WIFE OF
AMJAD ALI VILL-NO.2 ADAVETI
PO-TEWARIPAL
PSSOOTEA, DISTRICT-BISWANATH
ASSAM
PIN-784175
4:NURJAHAN BEGUM
MEMBER
WARD NO.5 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT WIFE OF
ABDUL KARIM VILL-NO.2 ADAVETI
PO-TEWARIPAL
PSSOOTEA
DISTRICT-BISWANATH
ASSAM, PIN-784175
5:AJIRON KHATUN
MEMBER
WARD NO.8 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT WIFE OF
SAFIKUL ISLAM VILL-UTTAR KALAKATI
PO-TEWARIPAL
PSSOOTEA
DISTRICT-BISWANATH
ASSAM, PIN-784175
6:AMINA KHATUN
MEMBER
WARD NO.10 OF 14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT WIFE OF
SAMSHUL ISIAM VILL-NO.2 BHOJMARI
PO-TEWARIPAL
PSSOOTEA
DISTRICT-BISWANATH
ASSAM, PIN-784175
Page No.# 3/6
7:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM
PANCHAYAT RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI781006
8:THE COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSAM
GUWAHATI781037
9:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
BISWANATH
DISTRICT-BISWANATH ASSAM
PIN784176
10:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
BISWANATH ZILLA PARISHAD
PO PS-BISWANATH
DISTRICT-BISWANATH ASSAM
PIN784176
11:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
BISWANATH DEVELOPMENT BLOCK -CUMEXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
SECRETARY
BISWANATH ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT
BURIGANG
POBURIGANG
PS-BISWANATH
DISTRICTBISWANATH ASSAM
PIN-784176
12:THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
OF FIRST MEETING HELD ON 27.06.2025 FOR OATH TAKING AND
ELECTION OF PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT OF 14 NO GILADHARI
MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT
DISTRICT-BISWANATH ASSAM
PIN-784176
13:THE SECRETARY
14 NO GILADHARI MUKH GAON PANCHAYAT
KARAYANI
TEWARIPAL
PS-SOOTEA
DISTRICTBISWANATH ASSAM
PIN- 78417
Page No.# 4/6
For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. M. K. Hussain, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Dutta, SC, PNRD
Ms. R. B. Bora, Jr. GA, Assam
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
18.12.2025
(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)
This appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment dated
08.12.2025, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No.
5918/2025.
One Burhan Ali (writ petitioner) was elected as the President of the
concerned Gaon Panchayat. Two Members of the concerned Gaon
Panchayat filed representation before the District Commissioner,
Biswanath, challenging the afore-noted election of Burhan Ali on the
ground that on the day when Burhan Ali was elected as President, there
were no sufficient number of Members present and voting.
The afore-noted election of Burhan Ali was cancelled by the District
Commissioner, Biswanath, vide order dated 10.09.2025 holding that the
meeting in which the election was held, was non-quorate.
This order of the District Commissioner, Biswanath, was put to
challenge by Burhan Ali by filing WP(C) No. 5918/2025, which challenge
was sustained and the order of cancellation dated 10.09.2025 was set
aside and Burhan Ali was allowed to function as the President of the
concerned Gaon Panchayat.
We have heard Mr. M. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the appellant;
Page No.# 5/6
Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, PNRD, and Ms. R.B. Bora, learned
Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondents.
The records reveal that there were 6 (six) Members present out of
total 10 (ten) Members of the concerned Gaon Panchayat.
Rule 46(3) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995
(hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 1995"), specifically provides that if
one-third or more of the total number of members called to the meeting
are not present within an hour of the time fixed for the meeting, the
Deputy Commissioner or the Sub-Divisional Officer, as the case may be,
or the officer empowered in this behalf, shall adjourn the meeting
pending fixation of another date by the Deputy Commissioner or the Sub-
Divisional Officer, as the case may be, not later than fifteen days of such
meeting.
Perforce, the provision of Rule 46(3) is to be read along with Section
18 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of
1994"), which provides the quorum and the procedure of the meeting of
the Gaon Panchayat.
According to Section 18 of the Act of 1994, the quorum for a
meeting of the Gaon Panchayat shall be one-third of the total number of
Members.
Rule 46(3) and Section 18 do not run counter and for any meeting of
a Gaon Panchayat, the quorum would be one-third of the total
Members.
In the present case, in a 10 (ten) Membered Gaon Panchayat, the
first meeting was held on notice, where 6 (six) Members were present
making it sufficiently quorate for the Members to go ahead with the
Page No.# 6/6
election process. It was only then Burhan Ali was elected as the President.
The decision of the District Commissioner, Biswanath, cancelling the
proceedings of the meeting and interfering with Burhan Ali having
become the President of the Gaon Panchayat was absolutely improper.
Precisely for this reason, the learned Single Judge set aside the decision
of the District Commissioner, Biswanath, cancelling the election of Burhan
Ali as the President of the concerned Gaon Panchayat.
The argument urged on behalf of the appellant, that the learned
Single Judge erred in point of law in conflating the provisions of Section
18 of the Act of 1994 with Rule 46(3) of the Rules of 1995, is misconceived.
Under Rule 46(3), no election could be held if one-third quorum was not
complete and, in the present case, the quorum was 4(four) in the ten-
Membered Panchayat.
Admittedly, 6 (six) Members were present at the time of election of
the President.
We are in perfect agreement with the judgment of the learned
Single Judge on the issue of quorum.
We thus find no merits in this appeal and, accordingly, it is dismissed.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
