Gauhati High Court
Rudhir Kumar Daimary vs The State Of Assam And Ors on 27 October, 2025
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010235502025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6068/2025
RUDHIR KUMAR DAIMARY
S/O- DAMBARUDHAR BRAHMA.
R/O- WARD NO. 7, BAGANSHALI, KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM,PIN- 783370.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS, DISPUR,
GUWAHATI- 781006, ASSAM.
2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR
PIN- 783370
ASSAM
3:THE DIRECTOR
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING
ASSAM
GUWAHATI
DISPUR
PIN -781006
4:THE SECRETARY
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 783370
5:THE KOKRAJHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Page No.# 2/4
REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY
KOKRAJHAR
PIN- 783370
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P BHARDWAJ, MR. S R RABHA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, BTC
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
27.10.2025
Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P.
Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned
Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. P. Kashyap, learned counsel for the respondent
Nos. 2 and 4 and Mr. A. Chakrabarty, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent Nos. 1 and 3.
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is the Chairman of
Kokrajhar Development Authority under the Bodoland Territorial Council. The
petitioner was appointed on 05.08.2025 by notification No.DoHUA Ecf.
No.524851/19 as Chairman of the Kokrajhar Development Authority for a tenure
of 5 years. The petitioner is in Charge of the office and is presently functioning
as such. Subsequently, the Principal Secretary of the Bodoland Territorial
Council, Kokrajhar on 09.10.2025, issued an Office Memorandum that in view of
the decisions adopted by the BTC all non-statutory/non-elected/adhoc
Organizations, Boards, Committees are hereby ceased to exist with immediate
effect. Subsequently, thereto, on 10.10.2025, the Secretary of Bodoland
Territorial Council, Kokrajhar issued the notification, whereby the Urban
Page No.# 3/4
Development Authority inter alia stood dissolved and the respective Executive
Officer of the Municipal Board/Urban Development Authority shall look after the
functioning of the Municipal Board/Urban Development Authority until further
orders. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed.
The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner by referring to the Assam
Town and Country Planning Act, 1959 submits that the petitioner was appointed
into a Statutory Development Authority. The removal of the members are
prescribed under Section 8B(4) of the said Act. It is submitted that it is only
under the conditions mentioned under Section 8B(4) that a person can be
removed. The conditions mentioned under Section 8B(4) are not applicable to
the petitioner, nor was any prior notice was given to the petitioner and
therefore, the removal of the petitioner from the present post of Chairman of
the Kokrajhar Urban Development Authority is contrary to and bad in law. He
fortifies his submissions by judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court,
rendered in Sub-Divisional Welfare Boards for Scheduled Tribes and Ors. Vs.
State of Assam and Ors. reported in 2017, 5 GLR 177. Referring to the said
judgment, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
question regarding the applicability of the "doctrine of pleasure" was also an
issue before the Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench, on the
facts of that case had concluded that the "doctrine of pleasure" would not be
applicable thereto. Furthermore, it was held that prior to dissolution an
opportunity of hearing was required to be granted by the State. It is submitted
that both these conditions are equally applicable to the facts of this case and
therefore, under such circumstances, the impugned order dated 10.10.2025
dissolving the authority is besides being contrary to the provisions of the Act of
1959, is also contrary to the ratio laid down by the Division Bench in Sub-
Page No.# 4/4
Divisional Welfare Boards for Scheduled Tribes (supra). He therefore, submits
that the appropriate order be issued interfering with the said notification issued
by the State and during the pendency of the writ petition the adequate interim
order staying the operation of the said notification be issued.
Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel on the other hand submits that she
would like to complete her instructions without instructions she is unable to
submit as to why the person concerned has been removed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that at this stage, the respondents should be permitted to obtain their
instructions as to the basis of issuance of the impugned notification and the
order.
It is also seen from the pleadings at paragraph No.14 that there is an
averment that the petitioner is still holding the post of Chairman of Kokrajhar
Development Authority. Accordingly, let this matter be listed again on
14.11.2025, permitting the respondents to complete their instructions.
Let notice be issued on interim prayer returnable on 14.11.2025.
The parties are directed to maintain the status quo till the next date fixed
of listing.
Although, the notices have not been issued, extra copies be furnished
within a period of 2 working days from today on all the learned counsel for the
respondents.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
