Page No.# 1/7 vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 18 February, 2026

Author: Manish Choudhury

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                               Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010014682026




                                                         2026:GAU-AS:2511

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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/885/2026

         THE 19 NO ROWMARI GAON PANCHAYAT
         REPRESENTED BY THE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE SAID GAON
         PANCHAYAT, NAMELY, ROFIQUL ISLAM, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS SON OF
         ANISU AMBIA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RAKHALDUBI P.O. BALARBHITA,
         P.S. BAGUAN DISTRICT- GOALPARA, ASSAM. PIN- 783129.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
         REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
         DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI - 06.

         2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
          GOALPARA
         ASSAM. PIN- 783101

         3:THE GOALPARA ZILLA PARISHAD
          REPRESENTED
          BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
          GOALPARA ZILLA PARISHAD
          GOALPARA
         ASSAM. PIN- 783101.

         4:THE KAMAKHYABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT

          REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
          KAMAKHYABARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT
          KHARMUJA
          P.O. KHARMUJA
          P.S. GOALPARA
          DISTRICTGOALPARA
                                                                       Page No.# 2/7

             ASSAM. PIN- 783129.

            5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

             BALIJANA REVENUE CIRCLE
             GOALPARA
             P.O. AGIA
             P.S. GOALPARA
             DISTRICT- GOALPARA
             ASSAM. PIN- 783129.

            6:THE SECRETARY

             19 NO ROWMARI GAON PANCHAYAT
             P.O. BALARBHITA
             P.S. BAGUAN
             DIST. GOALPARA
             ASSAM. PIN. 783129

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A F N U MOLLAH, K ZAMAN

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P AND R.D.




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                         ORDER

Date : 18-02-2026

Heard Mr. A.F.N.U. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural Development Department for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 & 6; and Ms. U. Das, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 2 & 5.

2. The petitioner herein is 19 No. Rowmari Gaon Panchayat ['hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner Gaon Panchayat', for short], represented by its elected President.

Page No.# 3/7

3. The petitioner Gaon Panchayat is within the territorial jurisdiction of Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat, District - Goalpara. There is another Gaon Panchayat viz. Ramharir Char Khankhowa Gaon Panchayat within the jurisdiction of Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat.

4. It is the case of the petitioner Gaon Panchayat that three markets by the names of [i] Rowmari Daily Market; [ii] Rowmari Weekly Market; [iii] and Rowmari Cattle Market; were being run under the aegis of the petitioner Gaon Panchayat as the areas of the said three markets, according to the petitioner Gaon Panchayat, fall within the territorial limits of the petitioner Gaon Panchayat. It has been claimed that the markets are being run from a plot of land, covered by Dag no. 380, which is a Government khas land.

5. The petitioner Gaon Panchayat has further stated that as the areas of the said three markets are within the territorial limits of the petitioner Gaon Panchayat, the markets were settled by separate Orders of Settlement, all dated 14.08.2025, for the Financial Year : 2025 - 2026 in favour of the lessees, who emerged as the highest valid bidders in bidding processes initiated for settlement.

6. A dispute has arisen as regards the areas of the three markets.

7. The petitioner Gaon Panchayat has approached this Court aggrieved by an Order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the Executive Officer of the jurisdictional Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat. By the Order dated 17.11.2025, the Executive Officer, Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat i.e. the respondent no. 4 Page No.# 4/7

has annulled the settlements made by the petitioner Gaon Panchayat in respect of the three markets for the Financial Year : 2025 - 2026. The reason assigned for such annulment is that a Report has been received from the Circle Officer, Balijan Revenue Circle to the effect that the areas of the said three markets fall under more than one Gaon Panchayat and hence, the settlement of the said three markets ought to have been settled only by the jurisdictional Anchalik Panchayat.

8. In a Report dated 07.10.2025 [Annexure-4] submitted by the Circle Officer, Balijan Revenue Circle, Goalpara [the respondent no. 5], it has been reported that the areas of Dag nos. within which the markets are located do not entirely fall only inside Rowmari Gaon Panchayat and the areas fall partly also within the territorial limits of Ramharir Char Khankhowa Gaon Panchayat.

9. By an Executive Order bearing no. E-511528/55 dated 21.05.2025, the Government has laid down guidelines for settlement of Haats/Ghats/Fisheries/Pounds, etc. As per Clause 15 of the Executive Order, where the assets fall under more than one Gaon Pachayat, it will be settled by the concerned Anchalik Panchayat.

10. The dispute arising herein is whether the areas of the three markets fall solely within the territorial limits of Rowmari Gaon Panchayat, that is, the petitioner Gaon Panchayat or some of the areas also fall within the territorial limits of the nearby Gaon Panchayat, that is, Ramharir Char Khankhowa Gaon Panchayat. It is only in the event the areas of the three markets fall within the territorial limits of the petitioner Gaon Panchayat, the petitioner Gaon Panchayat Page No.# 5/7

would retain the authority and jurisdiction to settle the markets on its own. However, in the event a part of areas of land wherefrom the three markets are being operated also come within the territorial limits of Ramharir Char Khankhowa Gaon Panchayat, then the jurisdictional Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat would assume the role of the settlement authority.

11. Having regard to the nature of dispute projected in this writ petition, Mr. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural Development Department has submitted that such dispute should be referred to the State Government for resolution as the State Government under Section 135 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended, has been vested with the power, authority and jurisdiction to decide such a dispute. He has further submitted that as factual dispute would fall for determination, this Court can dispose of this writ petition by referring the dispute to the State Government for resolution.

12. Section 135 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended, ['the Act', for short] has provided for resolution of disputes between Panchayats and local authorities. As per Section 135, if dispute arises between two or more Panchayat bodies and local authority or between any two local authorities the matter shall be referred to the Government or to such authority as the State Government may direct and the decision of the Government or such authority shall be final and conclusive. Section 2[5] and Section 2[7] of the Act have provided for the definitions of 'Local Authority' and 'Panchayat Raj Bodies' respectively. As per Section 2[5] of the Act, 'Local Authority' includes Gaon Sabha, Gaon Panchayat Anchalik Panchayat, Zilla Parishad, Municipal Corporation, Municipal Boards and Town Committees. As per Section 2[7] of the Page No.# 6/7

Act, 'Panchayati Raj Bodies' means the Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad.

13. As the dispute projected in this writ petition by the petitioner Gaon Panchayat is one regarding the areas of three markets and the bone of contention is among the petitioner Gaon Panchayat, Ramharir Char Khankhowa Gaon Panchayat and Kamakhyabari Anchalik Panchayat, it clearly falls within the nature of dispute envisaged in Section 135 of the Act. Therefore, instead of making an endeavour to adjudicate the dispute wherein factual disputes would also fall for determination, this Court having is of the considered view that this writ petition is not to be entertained at this stage. Instead, as the State Government has the authority to decide such a dispute, the dispute is to be referred to the State Government for resolution. It is accordingly ordered.

14. It is observed that the State Government while adjudicating the dispute shall provide an opportunity of hearing to all the involved local authorities/Panchayat Raj Bodies and can take the assistance of the jurisdictional revenue authorities and relevant land records, if a need arises, to decide the dispute. The decision shall be made as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of forty-five days from today.

15. A copy of this Order is to be supplied to Mr. Dutta, who will communicate the same to the Government in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department immediately to facilitate an expeditious resolution of the dispute.

16. Mr. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioner shall also furnish a copy of the writ petition along with annexures to Mr. Dutta by tomorrow.

Page No.# 7/7

17. This order disposes of the writ petition. No cost.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant