Parikshit Saikia vs The State Of Assam And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 852 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Parikshit Saikia vs The State Of Assam And Ors on 4 June, 2025

Author: Michael Zothankhuma

Bench: Michael Zothankhuma

                                                              Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010111142025




                                                        2025:GAU-AS:7243

                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                         Case No. : WP(C)/3003/2025

         GOLAGHAT NAGAR SAPTAHIK MODI BAZAR COMMITTEE
         TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY
         ACCORDINGLY -
         1. PARIKSHIT SAIKIA.
         AGE- 51 YEARS.
          S/O- LATE INDRESWAR SAIKIA.
          R/O- 187 GREEN ROAD,
          BYE LANE ONE, WARD NO.10, GOLAGHAT.
          P.O. AND P.S.- GOLAGHAT.
          DIST.- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785621.

         2. PARKASH PRATIM BORA.
         AGE-45 YEARS.
          C/O- BIREN BORA.
          R/O- NEAR BENGENAKHOWA GAON PANCHAYAT, PURANA
         AMULLAPATTY.
          P.O. AND P.S.- GOLAGHAT.
          DIST.-GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.
          PIN- 785621.



         VERSUS


         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
         TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
         OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

         2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-6.
                                                                     Page No.# 2/4

            3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
             GOLAGHAT
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            4:THE CHAIRMAN
             GOLAGHAT MUNICIPALITY BOARD.
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
             GOLAGHAT MUNICIPALITY BOARD.
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            6:THE PRESIDENT
             UNITED CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
             GOLAGHAT.
             DIST.- GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A K AZAD, H ALAM

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                           ORDER

04.06.2025

Heard Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner's members, who are street vendors, have been asked to shift from it's original location near Dhudar Ali Path to a remote and unsuitable location near Arengapara Bus Stop.

2. The petitioner's counsel submits that the impugned order dated 19.04.2025 passed by the District Commissioner, Golaghat, directing that the Page No.# 3/4

members of the petitioner Association should be shifted from it's original location to a different location, is in violation of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 and the Assam Street Vendors Rules, 2016.

3. The petitioner's counsel submits that the Golaghat Nagar Saptahik Modi Bazar Committee is not a registered association or committee.

4. Mr. M. Chetia, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3.

5. The petitioner Golaghat Nagar Saptahik Modi Bazar Committee has been represented by it's President and Secretary. However, the petitioner is not a registered association or committee.

6. In the case of Meghalaya Wine Dealers Association & Anr. Vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors., reported in 2010 (2) GLT 673, the Division Bench of this Court has held that an association cannot file a writ application unless it attains the character of a juristic person or a legal person by registering it under a statute. Thus, in terms of the Division Bench judgment of this Court, an unregistered association is not a legal person and as such, writ petitions are not maintainable at their instance. However, though the petitioner does not assume the character of a juristic person, the members of the petitioner association/committee can always enforce their legal or fundamental rights by filing writ petitions. In the present case, it is not the case of the petitioner that it's members are unable to approach this Court by reason of poverty or any other reason. As such, this Court finds that the petitioner being an unregistered association/ committee, it does not have any locus standi to file this writ petition.

Page No.# 4/4

7. Accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant