Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/5771/2024 on 24 April, 2025
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page 1 of 195
GAHC010220362024
2025:GAU-AS:4917
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
[THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH]
WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5346/2024
1. Asrof Kalam Azad Laskar, S/o Late Ashab Uddin
Laskar, R/o Village Nutan Ramnagar Part IV, P.O.
Nutan Ramnagar, P.S. Sonai, District - Cachar, Assam,
Pin - 788119.
2. Abu Siddik Laskar, S/o Late Namor Ali Laskar, R/o
Village - Kaptampur Part - 18, P.O. Kaptanpur, P.S.
Lakhipur, District - Cachar, Assam, Pin - 788119.
3. Junu Babu Laskar, C/o Mahibur Raja Laskar, R/o
Village - Dakshin Mohanpur Part VII, P.O. Dakshin
Mohanpur, P.S. Sonai,District - Cachar, Assam, Pin -
788119.
4. Mizanur Rahman Laskar, C/o Misba Uddin Laskar, R/o
Village and P.O. Kachudaram Part-I, P.S. Sonai,
District - Cachar, Assam, Pin - 788119.
..................Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to The Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Assam, Dispur, Guwahati - 781006.
Page 2 of 195
2. The State Election Commission, represented by its
Election Commissioner, Aditya Tower, 2nd Floor,
Opposite Downtown Hospital, G.S Road, Dispur,
Guwahati - 06, Kamrup (M), Assam.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Assam, Dispur, Guwahati - 781006.
4. The Commissioner Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Assam, Panjabari, Juripar, Guwahati -
781037.
5. The District Commissioner Cachar-cum-Chairman
Delimitation Commission For Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District - Cachar, Assam, Pin -
788001.
6. The Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad-
cum-Member Secretary, Delimitation Commission for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O. and District - Cachar,
Assam, Pin -788001.
7. The Election Officer of District-Cachar-cum-Member
Delimitation Commission for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District - Cachar, Assam, Pin -
788001.
8. The Block Development Officer, Sonai Development
Block, P.O. Sonai, District - Cachar, Assam, Pin -
78811.
...................Respondents
Page 3 of 195
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5613/2024
1. Abdul Ahad Laskar S/o Abdul Gofur Laskar Vill –
Rongpur Part-I, P.O. Appin, District – Hailakandi,
Assam.
2. Rubul Ahmed Laskar S/o Soyed Ahmed Laskar Vill –
Paloicherra Part-II, P.S. Hailakandi, District –
Hailakandi, Assam.
3. Amir Uddin Barbhuiya S/o Lt. Taleb Uddin Barbhuiya
Vill – Baldabaldi Part-I, P.O. Sultanicherra, P.S.
Ramnathpur, District – Hailakandi Assam.
4. Sahidul Alom Laskar S/o Abdul Motlib Laskar Vill-
Boalipar Part-II, PO. Boalipar Bazar, District
Hailakandi, Assam.
..................Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 6.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by Election Commissioner, Aditya Tower, 2nd Floor,
Down Town, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam Panchayat and Rural Development, Dispur,
Guwahati- 6.
4. The Commissioner Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Panjabari, Juripar, Guwahati – 37.
Page 4 of 195
5. The District Commissioner, Hailakandi, P.O. and P.S.
Hailakandi, District – Hailakandi, Assam Pin – 788151.
6. The District Delimitation Commission, Hailakandi,
represented by the Chairman, P.O. and P.S.
Hailakandi, District – Hailakandi, Assam, Pin -788151
7. The Chief Executive Officer, Hailakandi Zilla Parishad,
P.O. and P.S. Hailakandi, District -Hailakandi, Assam,
Pin – 788151.
8. The Election Officer, Hailakandi, P.O. and P.S.
Hailakandi, District – Hailakandi, Assam, Pin – 788151.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5631/2024
1. Nilima Begum Laskar, W/o Late Amin Uddin Laskar,
Vill – Natun Ramnagar Part-IV, P.O. Daskhin
Mohanpur, P.S. Sonai, District – Cachar (Assam).
2. Rafiqul Hoque Barbhuiya, S/o Late Khalilur Rahman
Barbhuiya, Village and P.O. – Saidpur Part-II, District
– Cachar (Assam).
3. Atikur Rahman Barbhuiya, S/o Late Safiqur Rahman
Barbhuiya, Village- Dakshin Krishnapur, P.O.-
Sonabari Ghat, District – Cachar (Assam).
4. Taher Barbhuiya, S/o Robiul Rahman Barbhuiya, Vill –
Dhanchari Part-II, P.O. – Sildubi, District – Cachar
(Assam).
5. Jahan Uddin Mazumder, S/o Late Asador Ali
Mazumder, Vill – Gobindanagar Part-I, P.O. – Dakshin
Mohanpur, District – Cachar (Assam).
Page 5 of 195
6. Sabina Yeasmin Laskar, W/o Gulam Wajid Barbhuiya,
Vill – Natun Ramnagar Part-IV, P.O. – Dakshin
Mohanpur, District – Cachar (Assam).
7. Baktar Uddin Laskar, S/o Late Abdur Rahman Laskar,
Vill – Kaptanpur Part-XVI, P.O. Amjunghat, P.S. –
Lakhipur, District – Cachar (Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Additional
Chief Secretary to The Government of Assam,
Panchayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
2. The State Election Commission, represented by its
Registrar, Aditya Tower, 2nd Floor, Down Town, G.S.
Road, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Commissioner, Cachar – cum- Chairman
Delimitation Commission for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788001.
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad-
cum-Member Secretary, Delimitation Commission for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O. and District – Cachar,
Assam, Pin – 788001.
Page 6 of 195
6. The Election Officer of District – Cachar-cum-Member
Delimitation Commission for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788001.
7. The Block Development Officer, Sonai Development
Block, P.O. – Sonai,District – Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788119.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5664/2024
Dilwar Hussain Barbhuiya, Son of Late Faizur Rahman
Barbhuiya, Resident of Village Dakhin Jasnabad Part-
II, P.O. – Tantoo, P.S. – Lala, District- Hailakandi,
Assam, Pin – 788163.
………………Petitioner
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to The Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 6.
2. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Assam, Juripar, Panjabari,
Guwahati – 37.
Page 7 of 195
3. The Deputy Secretary To The Governmentof Assam,
Panchayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati- 06.
4. District Delimitation Commission, represented by its
Chairman-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi,
P.O. and P.S. – Hailakandi, District – Hailakandi,
Assam, Pin – 788151.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5706/2024
1. Habibur Rahman, S/o Late Abdul Khalek, Village –
Sidhaguri, P.O. Burgaon, P.S. Mayong, Mouza –
Pakaria, District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782411.
2. Ashar Uddin Ahmed, S/o Late Alimuddin, Village –
Sidhaguri, P.O. Burgaon, P.S. Mayong, Mouza –
Pakaria, District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782411.
3. Shahid Ullah, S/o Late Ajimuddin, Village – Sidhaguri,
P.O. Burgaon, P.S. Mayong, Mouza – Pakaria, District
– Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782411.
4. Shajahan Ali, S/o Late Akkash Ali, Village – Patekibori,
P.O. Burgaon, P.S. Mayong, Mouza – Pakaria, District
– Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782411.
………………Petitioners
Page 8 of 195
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 6.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by Election Commissioner, Aditya Tower, 2nd Floor,
Down Town, G.S. Road, Dispur, Ghy – 6.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
4. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar, Ghy –
37.
5. The District Commissioner, Morigaon P.O., P.S. and
District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782105.
6. The District Delimitation Commission, Morigaon
represented by the Chairman, P.O. and P.S. Morigaon,
District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782105.
7. The Chief Executive Officer, Morigaon Zilla Parishad,
P.O., P.S. and District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin –
782105.
8. The Election Officer, Morigaon, P.O., P.S. and District
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782105.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5751/2024
Page 9 of 195
1. Abdul Motleb S/o Late Ajbar Ali, Resident of Vill and
P.O. Brahman Sahshan Part-I Block-1, P.S.
Nilambazar, District – Karimganj (Assam).
2. Khalil Uddin S/o Late Basir Ali, Resident of Vill and
P.O. Brahman Sahshan Part-I Block-1, P.S.
Nilambazar, District – Karimganj (Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam represented by the Principal And
Secretary to the Government of Assam Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Dispur, Guwahati –
06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by the Secretary, Down Town, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-The District Commissioner,
Karimganj (Assam), Pin – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5771/2024
1. Dakshinkul Village Development Council, represented
by its President Rohul Al Amin Mim, Aged About 45
Page 10 of 195
Years, S/o Late Abdul Mutlib, R/o Vill – Dakshinkul
(Mirzapur Part-II), P.O. – Bhanga Bazar District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin -788701.
2. Dakshinkul Village Development Council, Co-
represented by its Secretary Md. Abdul Basit, Aged
About 43 Years, S/o Late Ishak Ali, Vill – Dakshinkul
(Mirzapur Part-II), P.O. – Bhanga Bazar, District-
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788701.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati – 781006.
2. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
3. The State Election Commission, represented by
Election Commissioner, Aditya Tower, 2nd Floor,
Down Town, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
4. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
5. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
6. The Karimganj District Delimitation Commission,
represented by its Chairman-cum-District
Page 11 of 195
Commissioner, Karimganj for Assam Panchayat
Election, District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
7. The Member Secretary, Karimganj District
Delimitation Commission-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Karimganj Zilla Parishad for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin –
788710.
8. The Member, Karimganj District Delimitation
Commission-cum-Election Officer, Karimganj for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O. and District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5810/2024
1. Abdul Aziz Mazumder, S/o Late. Azizur Rahman
Mazumder, Village – Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. –
Kanchanpur, P.S. and District – Hailakandi, Assam.
2. Khalique Uddin Laskar, S/o Noor Uddin Laskar, Village
– Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. – Kanchanpur, P.S. and
District – Hailakandi, Assam.
3. Haris Uddin Laskar, S/o Late Nichar Ali Laskar, Villag
e- Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O.- Kanchanpur, P.S. and
District – Hailakandi, Assam.
4. Sajal Uddin Laskar, S/o Late Siddek Ali Laskar, Village
– Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. – Kanchanpur, P.S. and
District – Hailakandi, Assam.
Page 12 of 195
5. Samsuzzaman Laskar, S/o Sayed Ahmed Laskar,
Village- Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. – Kanchanpur, P.S.
and District – Hailakandi, Assam.
6. Ali Ahmed Laskar, S/o Samsul Hoque Laskar,Village –
Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. – Kanchanpur, P.S. and
District – Hailakandi, Assam.
7. Anowar Hussain Laskar, S/o Fayzul Hoque Laskar,
Village – Kanchanpur Part-II, P.O. – Kanchanpur P.S.
and District – Hailakandi, Assam.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
2. The Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam,
Panchayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The State Election Commissioner, Assam, Guwahati.
4. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam,
Panhayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
5. The District Delimitation Commission, Hailakandi to be
represented by its Chairman, Hailakandi.
6. The District Commissioner, Hailakandi, P.S. and
District – Hailakandi, Assam.
7. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Hailakandi,
P.S. and District – Hailakandi, Assam.
Page 13 of 195
8. The District Election Officer, Hailakandi, Assam,
Guwahati.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 5984/2024
Md. Rafiqul Islam, S/o Alhaj Rustam Ali, Vill –
Puthimari, P.O. Mangaldai, District – Darrang (Assam).
………………Petitioner
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Dispur, Guwahati –
06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by the Secretary, Down Town, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-the District Commissioner,
Darrang, (Assam), Pin – 784125.
……………….Respondents
Page 14 of 195
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 6347/2024
Ali Ahmed Laskar, S/o Abdur Rashid Laskar, R/o Vill –
Vichingcha Part-II, P.O. Vichingcha Part-II, District –
Hailakandi, Assam, Pin Code – 788155, Phone No.
8486454535.
………………Petitioner
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Secretary,
Down Town, Dispur, Guwahati-781006.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by the Secretary, Down Town, Dispur, Guwahati –
781006.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati -7 81037.
4. The District Commissioner, Hailakandi, District –
Hailakandi, Assam, Pin Code -788710.
5. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-the District Commissioner,
Hailakandi, Assam, Pin Code – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 6413/2024
Page 15 of 195
Shams Uddin Barlaskar, Son of Late Sarafath Ali
Barlaskar, Village Vichingcha Part-II, P.O. Vichingcha
P.S. and District – Hailakandi, Assam Pin – 788155.
………………Petitioner
-Versus-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur Guwahati
– 6.
2. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Assam, Juripar, Panjabari,
Guwahati – 37.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
4. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam
Panchayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
5. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Hailakandi,
P.O. and P.S. Hailakandi, District – Hailakandi, Assam,
Pin- 788151.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 6768/2024
Page 16 of 195
1. Abdur Rouf Choudhury, S/o Late Abdus Sukkur
Choudhury, R/o Village – Mambari (Now Sripur (Pkd),
P.O. and P.S. Patharkandi, District – Sribhumi, Assam.
2. Shamim Uddin Ahmed, S/o Lukush Uddin Ahmed, R/o
Village – Mambari (Now Sripur (Pkd), P.O. and P.S.
Patharkandi, District – Sribhumi, Assam.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
By its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented By
Its Chairman-cum-The District Commissioner, Sri
Bhumi Assam, Pin- 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 6829/2024
1. Lamajuar Goan Panchayat Bay Ainee Delimitation
Protibadi Moncho, represented by its President
Page 17 of 195
Abadur Rahman, Age 52 Yrs, S/o Late Ataur Rahman,
Old Ward No – 1 (New Ward No-8).
2. Lamajuar Goan Panchayat Bay Ainee Delimitation
Protibadi Moncho, represented by its Vice-President
Alauddin, Age 49 Yrs, S/o Late Samsuddin, Old Ward
No – 2 (New Ward No-9).
3. Lamajuar Goan Panchayat Bay Ainee Delimitation
Protibadi Moncho, represented by its Gen. Secy.
Badaruddin, Age 53 Yrs, S/o Late Burhanuddin,
Village – Lamajuar Part 2 Old Ward No-1 (New Ward
No-8).
4. Lamajuar Goan Panchayat Bay Ainee Delimitation
Protibadi Moncho, represented by its Asstt. Gen. Secy.
Zilal Uddin, Age 36 Yrs, S/o Tasabbir Ali, Old Ward No
– 2 (New Ward No-8), All Are R/o Village Lamajuar
Part No-1 P.O. Bhanga Bazar, P.S. Badarpur, District
– Sribhumi (Karimganj), Assam, Pin – 788701.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
Page 18 of 195
3. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by Election Commissioner of Assam, Dispur, Down
Town, G.S. Road, Guwahati – 06, Assam.
4. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
5. The Commissioner to the Government of Assam,
Commissionerate of Panchayat and Rural
Development, Assam, Panjabari, Guwahati – 781037.
6. The Karimganj District Delimitation Commission,
represented by its Chairman-cum-District
Commissioner, Karimganj for Assam Panchayat
Election, District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
7. The Member Secretary, Karimganj District
Delimitation Commission-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Karimganj Zilla Parishad for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin –
788710.
8. The Member, Karimganj District Delimitation
Commission-cum-Election Officer, Karimganj for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O. and District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 7029/2024
1. Abdul Latif, S/o Late Abdul Hoque, R/o Vill –
Chukabahi, P.O. Lalpool Bazar, P.S. Dalgaon, District
– Darrang, Assam.
Page 19 of 195
2. Fakaruddin Ahmed, S/o Lt. Riazuddin Ahmed, R/o Vill
– Chukabahi, P.O. Lalpool Bazar, P.S. Dalgaon, District
– Darrang, Assam.
3. Amiruddin, S/o Late Siraj Al, R/o Vill – Chukabahi, P.O.
Lalpool Bazar, P.S. Dalgaon, District – Darrang,
Assam.
4. Chan Mahmood, S/o Late Akbar Ali, R/o Vill –
Chukabahi, P.O. Lalpool Bazar, P.S. Dalgaon, District
– Darrang, Assam.
5. Kafiluddin, S/o Late Omar Ali, R/o Vill – Chukabahi,
P.O. Lalpool Bazar, P.S. Dalgaon, District – Darrang,
Assam.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
2. The State of Election Commission, Assam,
represented by Election Commissioner, Aditya Tower,
2nd Floor, Down Town, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati
– 6.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 6.
4. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Juripar, Panjabari,
Guwahati – 37.
Page 20 of 195
5. The District Commissioner, Darrang – cum- Chairman
Delimitation Commission For Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Darrang, Assam, Pin –
784125
6. The Chief Executive Officer, Darrang Zilla Parishad-
cum-Member Secretary Delimitation Commission for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O. and District –
Darrang, Assam, Pin – 784125
7. The Election Officer of Darrnag District-cum-Member
Delimitation Commission For Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Darrang, Assam, Pin –
784125.
8. The Block Development Officer, Bechimari
Development Block, P.O. Bechimari, District –
Darrang, Assam, Pin – 784125.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 2/2025
1. Hussain Ahmed Choudhury, S/o Late Masaddar Ali
Choudhury, Vill – Tarinipar Part-I, P.O. Govindapur
(West), P.S. Katigorah, District – Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788804.
2. Milon Roy, S/o Late Sunil Roy, Vill – Khelma Part-VII,
P.O. Gumrah, P.S. Kalain, District – Cachar, Assam,
Pin-788815.
3. Jiyaur Rahman, S/o Kamal Uddin, Vill – Burunda Part-
III, P.O. Hilara, P.S. Kalain, District – Cachar, Assam,
Pin – 788815.
Page 21 of 195
4. Najrul Islam Barbhuiya, S/o Jamir Uddin Barbhuiya,
Vill – Ganirgram Part-II, P.O. Ganirgram, P.S.
Katigorah, District – Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788825.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati-6.
2. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Assam, Juripar, Panjabari,
Guwahati – 37.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
4. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam,
Panchayat and Rural Development Department,
Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
5. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Cachar,
P.O. and P.S. Silchar, District – Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788011.
6. The Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad-
cum-Member Secretary District Delimitation
Commission, P.O. and P.S. Silchar, District – Cachar,
Assam, Pin – 788001.
Page 22 of 195
7. The Election Officer Cachar-cum-Member District
Delimitation Commission, P.O. and P.S. Silchar,
District – Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 34/2025
1. Monjur Ahmed, S/o Late Numan Uddin, Vill – Mahakal
Part-II, P.O. Mahakal, District – Sri Bhumi (Assam),
2. Sufian Ahmed, S/o Late Abdul Hasim, Vill – West
Hasanpur, P.O. – Hasanpur, District – Sri Bhumi
(Assam).
3. Abdus Salam, S/o Moklisur Rahman, Vill – Mohakal
Part-I, P.O. – Mahaka, District – Sri Bhumi (Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
Page 23 of 195
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-The District Commissioner, Sri
Bhumi (Assam), Pin – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 40/2025
1. Md. Ayub Ali, S/o Late Abdul Hamid, R/o Vill – Sonapur
No. 1, P.O. Sonapur, P.S. Bihpuria, District –
Lakhimpur (Assam).
2. Abdul Gafur, S/o Late Sabed Ali, R/o Vill – Sonapur
No. 1, P.O. Sonapur, P.S. Bihpuria, District-
Lakhimpur (Assam).
3. Khalilur Rahman, S/o Ijjat Ali, R/o Vill – Sonapur No.
1, P.O. Sonapur, P.S. Bihpuria, District – Lakhimpur
(Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
Page 24 of 195
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-the District Commissioner,
Lakhimpur (Assam), Pin -7 87001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 42/2025
1. Abdul Jalil, S/o Late Abdul Jabbar, R/o Vill. and P.O.
Sadarashi Part-I, P.S. Karimganj, District – Sri Bhumi
(Assam).
2. Abdul Ahad, S/o Abdul Jabbar, R/o Vill. and P.O.
Sadarashi Part-I, P.S. Karimganj, District – Sri Bhumi
(Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Dispur, Guwahati –
06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by the Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Panjabari, Juripar, Guwahati – 37.
Page 25 of 195
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-The District Commissioner, Sri
Bhumi (Assam), Pin – 788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 43/2025
1. Sheikh Hasina Khatun, W/o Bahar Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
2. Tahaj Ali, S/o Altap Hussain, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II, (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S.
Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
3. Saiful Islam, S/o Altap Hussain, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
4. Bahar Ali, S/o Altap Hussain, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
5. Horjot Ali @ Hajrat Ali, S/o Ayzal Hoque, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
6. Hachina Khatun, W/o Hajrat Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
7. Mohibul Islam, S/o Sattar Ali, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
Page 26 of 195
8. Mohidul @ Mohidul Islam, S/o Sattar Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
9. Rofiqul Islam, S/o Sattar Ali, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
10. Sattar Ali, S/o Late Ali Akabar, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
11. Altap Hossain, S/o Late Tohar Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin- 783349.
12. Soneka Khatun, W/o Mohidul Islam, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
13. Johira Khatun, D/o Tohar Ali, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
14. Sohidul Islam @ Shohidul Islam, S/o Altap Hussain,
R/o Village – Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O.
Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam,
Pin – 783349.
15. Haran Ali, S/o Habes Ali, R/o Village – Boyzeralga Part-
II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
16. Joynal Abddin @ Joynal Abedin, S/o Mohar Ali R/o
Village – Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O.
Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam,
Pin – 783349.
Page 27 of 195
17. Sona Ullah Sheikh, S/o Late Seken Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
18. Saher Ali, S/o Altap Hussain, R/o Village – Boyzeralga
Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
19. Behula Khatun, W/o Saher Ali, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
20. Haran Ali, S/o Late Elahi Sheikh, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
21. Sahera Khatun, W/o Altap Hussain, R/o Village –
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
22. Monowara Khatun, W/o Sattar Ali, R/o Village-
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
23. Aijal Hoque, S/o Late Tahar Ali, R/o Village-
Boyzeralga Part-II (Ward No. III), P.O. Bondihana,
P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783349.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Guwahati – 06.
Page 28 of 195
2. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Ghy – 06.
3. The State Election Commissioner of Assam, Aditiya
Tower 2nd Floor, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
4. The District Commissioner, Dhubri-cum-Chairman
District Delimitation Committee, Dhubri, District –
Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783301.
5. The Election Officer, Dhubri, District -Dhubri, Assam,
Pin – 783301.
6. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dhubri,
District – Dhubri, Assam, Pin – 783301.
7. The Circle Officer, Athani Revenue Circle, Dhubri,
Assam, Pin – 783349.
8. The Block Development Officer, Birsing Jarua
Development Office, Dhubri, District – Dhubri, Assam,
Pin – 783301.
9. The Secretary, South Boyzeralga Gaon Panchayat,
P.O. Bondihana, P.S. Fakirganj, District – Dhubri,
Assam, Pin – 783349.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 48/2025
1. Nagorik Adhikar Suraksha Moncho, represented by its
President, Ziaur Rahman, S/o Late Abdul Wahid, Vill –
Masly Delimited, Ward No. 2, Lamajuar Gaon
Panchayat (Old Ward No. 5 Masly Gaon Panchayat),
Page 29 of 195
ZPC-Srigouri, P.O. Bhanga Bazar, P.S. Badarpur,
District – Sribhumi, Assam, 788701.
2. Nagorik Adhikar Suraksha Moncho, represented By Its
Secretary, Nezam Uddin, S/o Abdul Manik, Vill – Masly
Delimited Ward No. 1, Lamajuar Gaon Panchayat (Old
Ward No. 2 Masly Gaon Panchayat), ZPC-Srigouri,
P.O. Bhanga Bazar, P.S. Badarpur, District – Sribhumi,
Assam, 788701.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati – 781006.
2. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary To The Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
4. The Commissioner and Secretary, Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Assam, Panjabari,
Juripar, Guwahati – 781037.
5. The Karimganj District Delimitation Commission,
represented by its Chairman-cum-District
Commissioner, Karimganj for Assam Panchayat
Election, District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
6. The Member Secretary, Karimganj District
Delimitation Commission-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Page 30 of 195
Karimganj Zilla Parishad for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin –
788710.
7. The Member, Karimganj District Delimitation
Commission-cum-Election Officer, Karimganj for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O and District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
8. The State Election Commission, represented by the
Chief Election Officer, Aditya Tower 2nd Floor, Near
Down Town Hospital, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati –
781006.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 52/2025
1. Saira Begum, W/o Islam Uddin Chowdhury, R/o
Village – Badripar, P.O. Badripar, P.S. Silchar, District
-Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788009.
2. Narayan Chandra Roy, S/o Late Nakul Chandra Roy,
R/o Village – Badripar, P.O. Badripar, P.S. Silchar,
District – Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788009.
3. Sala Uddin Choudhury, S/o Islam Uddin Choudhury,
R/o Village – Badripar, P.O. Badripar, P.S. Silchar,
District – Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788009.
4. Ranjit Kumar Das, S/o Late Ramakanta Das, R/o
Village – Badripar, P.O. Badripar, P.S. Silchar, District
– Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788009.
Page 31 of 195
5. Smti Miher Banu, W/o Late Ahmed Ali, R/o Village –
Badripar, P.O. Badripar, P.S. Silchar, District – Cachar,
Assam, Pin – 788009.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Assam Secretariat, Dispur, Guwahati –
781006, Assam.
2. The State Election Commission, represented by the
Election Commission, Aditya Tower 2nd Floor, Down
Town, G.S. Road, Dispur, Ghy, Assam, Pin -781006.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Assam Secretariat, Dispur, Guwahati,
Assam, Pin – 781006.
4. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati, Assam, Pin – 781037.
5. The District Level Committee Constituted for Ratifying
Block Boundaries and Recommend Demarcation With
Block Hq to The Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, represented by the District
Commissioner, Silchar, Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788001.
6. The District Commissioner-cum-Chairman
Delimitation Commission for Assam Panchayat
Election, Silchar, Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788001.
Page 32 of 195
7. The Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad-
cum-Member Secretary, Delimitation Commission For
Assam Panchayat Election, Silchar, Cachar, Assam,
Pin – 788001.
8. The Election Officer District Cachar-cum-Member
Delimitation Commission for Assam Panchayat
Election, Silchar, Cachar, Assam, Pin – 788001.
9. The Block Development Officer, Badripar
Development Block, Badripar, Cachar, Assam, Pin –
788009.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 101/2025
1. Surendra Kumar Sinha, S/o Late Bhubon Sinha,
Village – Uttor Bashkal Tila, P.O. Dullavchera District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788736.
2. Ashim Sinha S/o Ajit Kumar Sinha, Village – Shyam
Nagar, P.O. Pecha Ala, District – Karimganj, Assam,
Pin – 788734.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati – 781006.
Page 33 of 195
2. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development, Dispur,
Guwahati – 781006.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
4. The Commissioner and Secretary, Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Assam, Panjabari,
Juripar, Guwahati – 781037.
5. The Karimganj District Delimitation Commission,
represented by its Chairman-cum-District
Commissioner Karimganj for Assam Panchayat
Election, District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
6. The Member Secretary, Karimganj District
Delimitation Commission-cum-Chief Executive Officer
Karimganj Zilla Parishad for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin –
788710.
7. The Member, Karimganj District Delimitation
Commission-cum-Election Officer Karimganj for
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O and District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
8. The State Election Commission, represented by the
Chief Election Officer, Aditya Tower 2nd Floor, Near
Down Town Hospital, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati –
781006.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 102/2025
Page 34 of 195
1. Rajpasha Nagorik Suraksha Moncho, represented by
its President, Mahtab Hussain Tapadar, S/o Late
Akoddos Ali, Vill – Rajpasha, P.O. Bhanga Bazar, P.S.
Badarpur,District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788701.
2. Juber Ahmed Tapadar, S/o Mohiuddin Tapadar, Vill –
Rajpasha, P.O. Bhanga Bazar, P.S. Badarpur, District
– Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788701.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati – 781006.
2. The State of Assam, represented by the
Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
4. The Commissioner and Secretary, Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Assam, Panjabari,
Juripar, Guwahati – 781037.
5. The Karimganj District Delimitation Commission,
represented by its Chairman-cum-District
Commissioner, Karimganj for Assam Panchayat
Election, District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
Page 35 of 195
6. The Member Secretary, Karimganj District
Delimitation Commission-cum-Chief Executive Officer,
Karimganj Zilla Parishad for Assam Panchayat
Election, P.O. and District – Karimganj, Assam, Pin –
788710.
7. The Member, Karimganj District Delimitation
Commission-cum-Election Officer, Karimganj For
Assam Panchayat Election, P.O and District –
Karimganj, Assam, Pin – 788710.
8. The State Election Commission, represented by the
Chief Election Officer, Aditya Tower 2nd Floor, Near
Down Town Hospital, G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati –
781006.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 109/2025
1. Nazrul Islam, S/o Alhaj Abdul Matin, R/o Village –
Tinthengia, P.O. Doulatpur, P.S. Bihpuria, District –
Lakhimpur, Assam.
2. Enamul Haque, S/o Late Hussain Ali, R/o Village –
Tinthengia, P.O. Doulatpur, P.S. Bihpuria, District –
Lakhimpur, Assam.
3. Anowarul Islam, S/o Late Abdul Malek, R/o Village –
Tinthengia, P.O. Doulatpur, P.S. Bihpuria, District –
Lakhimpur, Assam.
………………Petitioners
Page 36 of 195
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Dispur, Guwahati –
06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-the District Commissioner,
Lakhimpur, Assam, Pin – 787001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 117/2025
1. Iftikar Ahmed, S/o Md. Moin Uddin, President, Assam
Minority Student Union, Akashiganga Anchalik, P.O.
Parakhuwa, District – Nagaon, Assam, Pin – 782441.
2. Samsuddin S/o Late Abdur Rahim, Secretary, Assam
Minority Student Union, Akashiganga Anchalik, P.O.
Parakhuwa, District – Nagaon, Assam Pin – 782441.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
Page 37 of 195
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal and
Secretary to the Government of Assam Panchayat and
Rural Development Department, Dispur, Guwahati –
06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-the District Commissioner, Nagaon,
Assam, Pin – 782401.
5. The District Electoral Registration Officer, Nagaon,
P.O. and District – Nagaon, Assam, Pin – 782401.
6. The Block Development Officer, Kothiatoli
Development Block, P.O. Rengbeng Sarupathar,
District – Cachar, Assam, Pin – 782427.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 131/2025
1. Jakir Hussain, S/o Late Abed Ali, R/o Village- No-1
Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
2. Dr. Abul Fazal, S/o Hashim Ali, R/o Village – No-1
Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
Page 38 of 195
3. Atabur Rahman, S/o Siraj Ali, R/o Village – Merorhabi,
P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District – Morigaon,
Assam, Pin -782121.
4. Sahed Ali, S/o Late Ramjan Ali, R/o Village – No-2
Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
5. Fajar Ali, S/o Suruj Ali, R/o Village – Khatobari, P.O.
Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District – Morigaon, Assam,
Pin – 782121.
6. Jesmin Sultana, W/o Dr. Abul Fazal, R/o Village – No.
1 Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
7. Abu Hanif, S/o Late Mafej Ali, R/o Village – No. 1
Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
8. Md. Israfil Ali, S/o Md. Ruhul Amin, R/o Village –
Kacharigaon, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782121.
9. Jabed Ali, S/o Yousuf Ali, R/o Village – Merorhabi, P.O.
Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District – Morigaon, Assam,
Pin – 782121.
10. Abdul Hakim, S/o Amsar Ali, R/o Village – No. 2
Gagalmari, P.O. Gagalmari, P.S. Mayong, District –
Morigaon, Assam, Pin-782121.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
Page 39 of 195
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Chief
Secretary to the Government Of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati-781006.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government Of
Assam, Panchayat And Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Assam, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 781037.
4. The Secretary, Assam State Election Commission,
Aditya Tower 2nd Floor, Near Down Town Hospital,
G.S. Road, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
5. The Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon, Assam, Pin –
782105.
6. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon-cum-
Authorized Officer, Laharighat Lac, District- Morigaon,
Pin – 782105.
7. The Chief Executive Officer, Morigaon Zilla Parishad,
District – Morigaon, Assam, Pin – 782105.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 376/2025
1. Abdur Rouf S/o Late Tafazzul Ali, a resident of Village
Brahmansasan under Lakhibazar P.S. Nilambazar,
District – Sribhumi, Pin – 788722.
2. Zakir Hussain S/o Abdul Salam, a resident of Village
P.O. and P.S. Nilambazar under Nilambazar Zilla
Page 40 of 195
Parishad Constituency, District – Sribhumi, Assam, Pin
– 788722.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam to be represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati- 781006.
2. Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development
Department, Dispur, Guwahati – 781006.
3. District Commissioner, Sribhumi P.O. and District –
Sribhumi, Assam.
4. Chairman, Assam State Election Commission, Dispur
Guwahati – 781006.
5. Chief Executive Officer, Sribhumi Zilla Parishad, P.O.
and P.S. Sribhumi, District – Sribhumi, Assam, Pin –
788710.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 641/2025
Page 41 of 195
1. Mizanur Rahman, S/o Mizanur Rahman, R/o
Ahmedpur Block Kutubpur, Bihpuria, Lakhimpur,
Assam
2. Md Jahagir Alom, S/o Late Somir Uddin, R/o
Ahmedpur Block, P.O. Kutubpur, P.S. Bihpuria,
District – Lakhimpur, Assam.
3. Motiur Rahman, S/o Soidur Rahman, R/o Ahmedpur
Block, P.O. Kutubpur, P.S. Bihpuria, District –
Lakhimpur, Assam.
4. Nurul Amin, S/o Sofiqul Islam, R/o Ahmedpur Block,
P.O. Kutubpur, P.S. Bihpuria, District – Lakhimpur,
Assam.
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government Of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Lakhimpur,
Assam, Pin – 787001.
Page 42 of 195
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 809/2025
Tafajul Hussain S/o Mutalib Sheikh, Village –
Chitalmari, P.O. Borpani, P.S. Kachua, District –
Nagaon, Assam.
………………Petitioner
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06, Assam.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Nagaon,
Assam, Pin – 782001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 927/2025
Page 43 of 195
Israfil Haque, S/o Ajim Uddin, Vill – Kakati Gaon, P.S.
Kampur, District – Nagaon (Assam).
………………Petitioner
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Nagaon, Pin
– 782001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 934/2025
Mubarak Hussain, S/o Late Muschar Ali, Vill – Gerjai
Pam, P.S. Kachuwa, District- Nagaon, Assam.
………………Petitioner
Page 44 of 195
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati – 06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Nagaon,
Pin- 782001.
……………….Respondents
With WRIT PETITION [C] NO. 1010/2025
1. Amir Uddin, S/o Saher Uddin, Vill – Kaziranga, P.O.
Gerjai Pam, P.S. Kachua, District – Nagaon, Assam.
2. Samsul Islam, S/o Late Sayadur Rahman, Vill –
Balisara, P.O. Gerjai Pam, P.S. Kachuwa, District –
Nagaon (Assam).
………………Petitioners
-VERSUS-
Page 45 of 195
1. The State of Assam, represented by the Principal
Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat
and Rural Development Department, Dispur,
Guwahati-06.
2. The Assam State Election Commission, represented
by its Secretary, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.
3. The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Panjabari, Juripar,
Guwahati – 37.
4. The District Delimitation Commission, represented by
its Chairman-cum-District Commissioner, Nagaon,
Pin- 782001.
……………….Respondents
Advocates :
For the Petitioners : Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury & Mr. A.C. Borbora, Senior
Advocates; Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, Mr. H.I.
Choudhury, Mr. A.K. Talukdar, Mr. Bhargav Das, Ms.
H. Yesmin, Mr. M.K. Hussain, Ms. S.Y. Ahmed, Ms.
F.H. Ahmed, Mr. M. Alom, Mr. A.H.M.R. Choudhury,
Mr. S.B. Laskar, Mr. H.A. Laskar, Ms. S. Dutta, Ms.
S.K. Nargis, Mr. F.H. Laskar, Ms. S. Begum, Ms. N.
Sultana, Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, Ms. B.B. Bordoloi, Mr. S.
Islam, Mr. S.I. Khan, Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, Ms. S. R.
Mazarbhuiya, Ms. A. Begum, Mr. B. Buragohain, Mr.
N.S. Laskar, Mr. A.A. Hussain, Mr. M. Robbani, Mr.
F.A. Laskar, Mr. A.S. Tapader, Mr. J.M. Sulaiman, Mr.
N. Haque, Mr. K. Uddin, Mr. A.K. Azad, Mr. S.R.
Barbhuiya, Mr. M. Hussain, Ms. D. Dutta, Ms. S. Das,
Page 46 of 195Mr. R.I. Mondal, Mr. A.K. Mollah, Mr. R.C. Paul, Mr.
A.R. Das, Mr. A.J. Atia, Ms. J. Mariyam, Ms. A.H. Atia,
Mr. J. Abedin, Mr. A. Alam, Mr. M.Z. Rahman, Mr. S.
Uddin, Mr. N.H. Mazarbhuiyan, Ms. L. Wajeeda, Mr.
M.H. Saikia & Mr. R.I. Bhuyan, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Mr. D. Saikia, Advocate General, Assam;
Mr. K. Konwar, Additional Advocate General, Assam &
Senior Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural
Development Department;
Mr. R. Dubey, Standing Counsel, Assam State Election
Commission [ASEC].
Dates of Hearing : 12.02.2025, 19.02.2025, 21.02.2025, 25.02.2025,
27.02.2025, 17.03.2025, 18.03.2025, 27.03.2025,
01.04.2025 & 03.04.2025.
Date of Judgment : 24.04.2025
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
JUDGMENT & ORDER
I. The Assail:-
1. This batch of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have
been preferred inter-alia to assail an exercise undertaken by the State
respondents as delimitation exercise on the basis of a Standard Operating
Page 47 of 195Procedure [SOP] framed in a Notification bearing no. E-449396/18 dated
03.08.2024, notified by the Government of Assam in the Panchayat & Rural
Development Department, for delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik
Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in the State of Assam; and the consequential
Notifications for the concerned districts, all dated 15.10.2024, stated to have
been published after commencement of the delimitation exercise by the
Government of Assam in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department
separately in respect of each of the districts in Assam.
2. The Notification no. E-449396/32 dated 03.08.2024, which was published in the
Assam Gazette in Issue no. 457 dated 21.08.2024, mentioned that the Standard
Operating Procedure [SOP] would be followed for delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads and its purpose would be
to ensure a systematic and efficient process of delimitation, to be followed by
the District Delimitation Commission. By the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, the
Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Government of Assam had notified
the Gaon Panchayats under the territorial jurisdiction of the respective Anchalik
Panchayat, along with their corresponding villages, in each of the districts in
Assam.
3. The challenges are being made to the Notification dated 03.08.2024 and the
Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, on the premise that the delimitation exercise so
carried out at the levels of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla
Parishads is in violation of the related provisions contained in the Constitution of
India and the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended; together with the the
Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] laid down in the Notification dated
03.08.2024. The provisions relying on which the challenges are being made by
the petitioners herein would be specifically referred to and considered in the later
part of this order.
Page 48 of 195
II. The contentions of the petitioners :-
4. Before making any dilation on the specific nature of challenges, it would be
apposite to find out, in an encapsulated manner, about the nature of pleadings
made in some of the writ petitions in this batch of writ petitions as it would be
of assistance to find out about the factual foundations laid by the petitioners
therein to mount the challenges qua the constitutional provisions; the statutory
provisions and the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP].
5. W.P.[C] no. 5346/2024 :Four petitioners, who are residents of areas within the
territorial jurisdiction of Sonai Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC], have
joined together to file this writ petition. The petitioners have stated that after
the delimitation process, though the total nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Cachar
District have remained the same, but, the total nos. of Gaon Panchayats under
Sonai LAC have been reduced from earlier 24 [twenty-four] to 18 [eighteen] and
the said 6 [six] Gaon Panchayats have been added to 6 [six] other LACs of Cachar
District. The petitioners are aggrieved by the act of reduction of the said 6 [six]
nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Sonai LAC. In Paragraph 9 of the writ petition, the
petitioners have claimed that as per the Census of 2001, the total population of
Sonai LAC before delimitation was 1,73,631 and after delimitation, the population
stands at 1,89,000. Before delimitation, there were 85 nos. of Villages under
Sonai LAC covering 24 nos. of Gaon Panchayats. But after delimitation, though
total nos. of Villages under Sonai LAC have increased from 85 to 100, but, the
total nos. of Gaon Panchayats have been reduced from 24 to 18. The petitioners
have cited that the total nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Borkhola LAC have been
increased from 21 to 30 and in Dholai LAC, from 27 to 30. The petitioners have
stated to have learnt from a reliable source that in Lakhipur LAC, the Gaon
Panchayat Constituencies like Singirbond Binnakandi Bagan and Bowali Chengur
have been formed with population of 2,006, 4,898 and 4,846 respectively. In
Paragraph 10 of the writ petition, the petitioners have stated that the State
Government has recently declared three categories of districts in Assam based
Page 49 of 195on population density or any other relevant factors and it has been learnt by the
petitioners that Cachar District falls in Category-‘B’ based on population density
to have Gaon Panchayats with population range from 8,500 to 11,500. It has
been stated that on scrutiny of records after delimitation, it has been found that
under Sonai LAC, Govindapur-Algapur Gaon Panchayat [7,935 households],
Sibpur Gaon Panchayat [7,364 households], West Singirbond Gaon Panchayat
[5,437 households], Nagdirgram-Chandpur Gaon Panchayat [8,173
households], Dakhin Mohanpur Gaon Panchayat [7,961 households] and
Sonabarighat Gaon Panchayat [8,122 households] have been formed with lesser
population than mandated under Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994,
as amended, for a Category-‘B’ District like Cachar. The petitioners have stated
that Baorikandi Gaon Panchayat have been formed with total 12,691 households.
The petitioners have further contended that a number of Gaon Panchayat Wards
have been formed with 600 to 1,400 population. In Paragraph 11 of the writ
petition, the petitioners have contended that Hatikhal Gaon Panchayat consisted
of five nos. of Revenue Villages before delimitation and after delimitation, two
new Revenue Villages have been added with Hatikhal Gaon Panchayat and its
name has been changed as Baroikandi Gaon Panchayat, which now consists of
12,500 electors. Apart from the changes made in the names of the Gaon
Panchayat, merger of Chandpur Gaon Panchayat with Dakhin Mohanpur Gaon
Panchayat and Kazidahar Gaon Panchayat; inclusion of Govindapur Gaon
Panchayat with Dakhin Mohanpur Gaon Panchayat; and many other changes of
like nature have created serious administrative and other serious consequences.
In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioners have stated
that the statements made in Paragraph 9, Paragraph 10 and Paragraph 11 of the
writ petition are true to their knowledge.
6. W.P.[C] no. 5613/2024 : In this writ petition, there are four writ petitioners, who
have claimed that they are permanent residents of Hailakandi District. According
to the petitioners, as averred in Paragraph 11 and Paragraph 12 of the writ
petition, Hailakandi District falls under Category-‘B’ District wherein the
Page 50 of 195
population of each Gaon Panchayat Constituency should be in the range from
8,500 to 11,500. The petitioners have claimed that on scrutiny of the records
after delimitation, it is found that a large number of Gaon Panchayats are formed
having more than 11,500 populations and as examples, they have cited the cases
of three Gaon Panchayats viz. [1] Algapur Mohanpur Gaon Panchayat [Villages=9
& Population=14,479]; [2] Naraynpur Gaon Panchayat [Villages=8 &
Population=12,786]; and [3] Bowerghat [Villages=7 & Population=12,355]. The
petitioners have further stated that on scrutiny of records, it is found that large
number of Gaon Panchayats are also found having less than 8,500 populations
and they have cited the cases of 30 [thirty] Gaon Panchayats. Some of these 30
[thirty] Gaon Panchayats are :- [1] Niskar Gaon Panchayat [Villages=4 &
Population=3,245]; [2] Pratap Nagar Gaon Panchayat [Villages-11 &
Population=4,004]; and [3] Ayenkhal Gaon Panchayat [Village=1 &
Population=4,050]. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the
petitioners have stated that the statements made in Paragraph 11 and Paragraph
12 of the writ petition are true to their knowledge.
7. W.P.[C] no. 5631/2024 : In this writ petition, there are seven nos. of writ
petitioners, who are permanent residents of different villages under the Sonai
Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC] of Cachar District. Six of them were
elected earlier as members of Panchayat. According to the petitioners, as averred
in Paragraph 9 and Paragraph 10 of the writ petition, seven nos. of LACs
including Sonai LAC, fall within the district of Cachar. But, except for Sonai LAC,
the number of Gaon Panchayats in all other LACs have been increased. The
petitioners have contended that in order to increase the number of Gaon
Panchayats in other LACs of Cachar District, most of the Gaon Panchayats of the
other LACs have even been formed with lesser population than prescribed for
Category-‘C’ District. As per the Census of India, 2001, Sonai LAC had a total
population of 1,73,631 before delimitation and after delimitation, the population
of Sonai LAC is about 1,89,000 approximately. Before delimitation, there were
85 nos. of villages under Sonai LAC covering 24 nos. of Gaon Panchayats and
Page 51 of 195
after delimitation, it is found that though the total number of villages under Sonai
LAC have increased from 85 to 100 but the nos. of Gaon Panchayats have been
reduced from 24 to 18. The petitioners have contended that as the population
of Sonai LAC has increased after delimitation, there could not have been
reduction in the number of Gaon Panchayats. In the affidavit filed in support of
the writ petition, the petitioners have stated that the statements made in
Paragraph 9 and Paragraph 10 of the writ petition are true to their knowledge.
8. W.P.[C] no. 5664/2024 : In this writ petition, the lone petitioner is a resident of
Village – Dakhin Josnabad Part-II under Lala Anchalik Panchayat, District –
Hailakandi. He has stated that as per the Press Note dated 20.06.2023 of the
Election Commission of India, District – Hailakandi falls within the category of
districts having higher population density. At one point, in Paragraph 5 of the
writ petition, the petitioner has averred that his village – Dakhin Josnabad Part-
II was earlier within the territorial jurisdiction of Tantoo-Dhanipur Gaon
Panchayat which consisted of seven nos. of villages – Tantoo, Sheralipur,
Niamatpur, Dhanipur, Lala-1, Dakhin Joshnabad Part-I and Dakhin Joshnabad
Part-II – with a total population of 10,150, according to the Census of 2001. At
the same time, in Paragraph 5, the petitioner has projected that Tantoo-
Dhanipur Gaon Panchayat consisted of eight nos. of villages [with population] –
Tantoo [1,287], Sheralipur [1,309], Niamatpur [1,339], Dhanipur [1,599],
Jalalpur [1,056], Lala-I [864], Dakhin Josnabad-I [486] and Dakhin Josnabad-
II [2,210], by including Village – Jalalpur [1,056] as an addition. To substantiate
such claim, the petitioner has annexed an extract of the purported Population
Census, 2001 of 329 nos. of villages wherein the names of the villages [with
population] – Tantoo [[1,287], Sheralipur [1,309], Niamatpur [1,339], Dhanipur
[1,599], Jalalpur [1,056], Lala-I [864], Dakhin Jansbad Part-I [486] and Dakhin
Jansbad Part-II [2,210] – are found included but it did not reflect the name of
the concerned Gaon Panchayat.In Paragraph 6 of the writ petition, the petitioner
has contended that the petitioner’s village – Dakhin Josnabad Part-II has been
arbitrarily bifurcated and attached with a newly constituted Gaon Panchayat –
Page 52 of 195
Joykrishnapur Gaon Panchayat vide the Notification dated 15.10.2024 of the
Panchayat & Rural Development Department notifying the Gaon Panchayats with
their corresponding villages under Hailakandi District and the same was issued
in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ
petition, the petitioners have stated that the statements made in Paragraph 5
and Paragraph 6 of the writ petition are matters of record. In Paragraph 7 of the
writ petition, affirmed to be true in the affidavit to the writ petition on the basis
of knowledge, the petitioner has contended that after bifurcation/delimitation,
the population of newly constituted Joykrishnapur Gaon Panchayat is 9,846
whereas the population of the newly formed Tantoo Gaon Panchayat is 4,244.
In the Notification dated 15.10.2024, the two Gaon Panchayats – Tantoo Gaon
Panchayat and Joykrishnapur Gaon Panchayat – are shown within Lala Gaon
Panchayat. Tantoo Gaon Panchayat consists of four nos. of Villages, – [1]
Bangalpur; [2] Bangalpur Grant; [3] Sheralipur; and [4] Tantoo. In the same
Notification, it is reflected that Joykrishnapur Gaon Panchayat consists of six nos.
of Villages, – [1] Dakhin Joshnabad-I; [2] Dakhin Joshnabad-II; [3]
Joykrishnapur; [4] Mohmmedpur-I; [5] Niyamatpur; and [6] Rongpur-V.
9. W.P.[C] no. 5706/2024 : In this writ petition, the four writ petitioners have stated
that they are permanent residents of Morigaon District. The petitioners have
contended that the delimitation process of constituencies for the Panchayats
have been undertaken by the State respondent authorities including the District
Delimitation Commission, without declaration about the category in which the
district of Morigaon falls as per the provision of sub-section [1] of Section 5 of
the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended, by the Assam Panchayat
[Amendment] Act, 2023. According to the petitioners, in absence of any
declaration of the category of the district in which Morigaon District falls, the
delimitation of constituencies made by the Notification dated 15.10.2024 of the
Panchayat & Rural Development Department exercising powers conferred under
sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended,
Page 53 of 195
thereby, notifying the Gaon Panchayats along with their corresponding villages
under Morigaon District cannot be acted upon for the purpose of holding
Panchayat Election.
10. W.P.[C] no. 5751/2024 : The two petitioners herein have claimed that they are
inhabitants of Brahman Sakhan Part-I Block-I Village in the district of Karimganj
and they are aggrieved by inclusion of their village in another Gaon Panchayat
after the delimitation process. By a Notification dated 15.10.2024 of the
Panchayat & Rural Development Department, issued in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 5 of the Assam Panachayat Act, 1994, as amended, the
Gaon Panchayats along with the corresponding villages under Karimganj District
have been notified. In Paragraph 4 of the writ petition, the petitioners have
pleaded that Karimganj District consisted of 95 nos. of Gaon Panchayats
including Brahman Sakhan Gaon Panchayat, and the petitioners’ Village –
Brahman Sakhan Part-I Block-I was within the Brahaman Sakhan Gaon
Panchayat under Karimganj South LAC. The Brahman Sakhan Gaon Panchayat
consisted of 12 nos. of Revenue Villages including Brahman Sakhan Part-I Block-
I Village. It has been averred in Paragraph 8 of the writ petition that in the draft
uploaded in the Official Website on 03.09.2024 reflecting the proposed
delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, it was found that Brahman Sakhan Gaon
Panchayat had been renamed as Ranibari Gaon Panchayat and the petitioners’
Village – Brahman Sakhan Part-I Block-I was proposed to be included in another
Gaon Panchayat, Hizim Dalgram Gaon Panchayat. In the affidavit filed in support
of the writ petition, the petitioners have stated that the statements made in
Paragraph 4 and Paragraph 8 of the writ petition are true to their knowledge.
The petitioners have contended that in the Notification dated 15.10.2024, it has
been notified that Hizim Dalgram Gaon Panchayat would consist of the following
villages, – [1] Angura Dunguri; [2] Brahman Sakhan Part-I Block-I; [3] Dalgram;
[4] Ghugrakuna Part-I; [5] Ghugrakuna Part-III; [6] Ghugrakuna Part-IV; [7]
Hizim; and [8] Hizimangura Part-I. In the said Notification, it has been further
notified that Ranibari Gaon Panchayat would consist of the following Villages, –
Page 54 of 195
[1] Barapunji Part-II; [2] Brahmanshasan Chak; [3] Brahmanshasan Part-I
[Block-2]; [4] Brahmanshasan Part-II; [5] Brahmanshasan Part-II [Block-I]; [6]
Kulchera Part-I; [7] Kulchera Part-II; [8] Kurtab Dewtali; [9] Lamabahadurpur
Part-I; [10] Nayagram Part-I; [11] Ramanikrishna TE; and [12] Ranibari.
According to the petitioners, Ranipur Gaon Panchayat was earlier known as
Brahman Sakhan Gaon Panchayat.
11. W.P.[C] no. 5771/2024 : The writ petition is filed on behalf of Dakshinkul Village
Development Council, claiming that its members are permanent residents of
Karimganj District, in order to challenge the final delimitation of Gaon Panchayats
under Karimganj District, which have been notified by a Notification bearing no.
File No. PDA.4/2024/GP/25 dated 15.10.2024 of the Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Government of Assam. The said Notification dated
15.10.2024 has inter-alia been issued in exercise of powers conferred under
sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended,
notifying the Gaon Panchayats along with their corresponding villages under
Karimganj District. In Paragraph 2 of the writ petition, the petitioners have
contended that, by the Notification dated 15.10.2024, the total nos. of Zilla
Parishads have been reduced from 20 to 16, by delimiting many Gaon
Panchayats in violation of Article 243 of the Constitution of India; Section 5 of
the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994; the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP]
framed by the Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Government of
Assam; and the Guidelines and Methodology of the Election Commission of India
[ECI]. The petitioners have specifically alleged that revenue Village – Mirzapur
Part-II [Dakshinkul Part] [Ward no. 7] has been excluded from Lamazuar Gaon
Panchayat and after such exclusion, it has been included in Mahakal Gaon
Panchayat, which is situated at a long distance. According to the petitioners,
Dakshinkul is a part of Revenue Village – Mirzapur Part-II.
Page 55 of 195
12. After reading the prayers made in this batch of writ petitions, it is found that the
writ petitions have contained, more or less, similar kinds of challenges and
prayers, which can be summarized in the following manner :-
Gist of prayers/challenges in the writ petitions
SI. No. Writ Petitions Challenges/Prayers
1 W.P.[C] no. 5346/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and direction not to
proceed with election of Gaon Panchayats under Sonai
LAC until final list is modified keeping existing 24 nos. of
Gaon Panchayats.
2 W.P.[C] no. 5613/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and direction not to
proceed with election of Gaon Panchayats until the
Notification is modified.
3 W.P.[C] no. 5631/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and direction not to
proceed with election of Gaon Panchayats under Sonai
LAC until final list is modified keeping existing 24 nos. of
Gaon Panchayats.
4 W.P.[C] no. 5664/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and attachment of the
petitioner’s Village – Dakhin Joshnabad Pt-II to
Joykrishnapur Gaon Panchayat under Lala Anchalik
Panchayat and direction to consider representations
dated 25.09.2024 in regards to keeping Village – Dakhin
Jishnabad Pt-II within territorial jurisdiction of Tantoo
Gaon Panchayat as per Clause 10, 4[vi] & [x] of SOP.
5 W.P.[C] no. 5706/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and direction to proceed
with election only after completion of due procedure
contemplated under Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat
Act, 1994.
6 W.P.[C] no. 5751/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far as inclusion of
Brahman Sakhan Pt-I Block-I within Hizim Dalgram
Page 56 of 195Gaon Panchayat and direction to retain Village –
Brahman Sashan Pt-I Block-I within its earlier Gaon
Panchayat i.e. Ranibari Gaon Panchayat.
7 W.P.[C] no. 5771/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 in Karimganj District and
direction not to proceed with the election until the
Notification dated 15.10.2024 is modified / altered, etc.
in conformity with the provisions of the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994 and SOP, Election Commission of
India [ECI] Guidelines.
8 W.P.[C] no. 5810/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024; direction to maintain the
previous areas / boundaries of the Kanchanpur Gaon
Panchayat Constituency of Hailakandi District as per the
Clause 4[iv] of SOP and Section 5 of the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994; and direction to conduct election
as per law under the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994.
9 W.P.[C] no. 5984/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far as inclusion of
Village – Puthimari within Dhariakhaity Gaon Panchayat;
and to retain Puthimari village within its earlier Gaon
Panchayat i.e. Langli Gaon Panchayat.
10 W.P.[C] no. 6347/2024 Notification dated 17.09.2024 & Final Notification dated
15.10.2024; and separation of Vichingcha Pt-II Village
from Rangauti Gaon Panchayat and its inclusion within
Bowerghat Gaon Panchayat; and direction to retain
Vichingcha Pt-II Village within Rangauti Gaon
Panchayat instead of Bowerghat Gaon Panchayat.
11 W.P.[C] no. 6413/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 & Notification dated
21.10.2024 whereby Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik
Panchayat and Zilla Parishad constituencies in the
district of Hailakandi have been notified; and direction to
the District Delimitation Committee [DDC] to delimit the
Page 57 of 195
Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla
Parishad constituencies by adhering, as far as possible,
to Article 243C of the Constitution of India r/w Section 5
of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 by conducting Public
Hearing as per Clause 8 of the SOP.
12 W.P.[C] no. 6768/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and inclusion of Village –
Sripur [pkd] within Ratabari Gaon Panchayat and to
retain Village – Sripur [pkd] either within its earlier Gaon
Panchayat i.e Narainpur Gaon Panchayat or the nearest
Patharkandi Gaon Panchayat.
13 W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024 The Notification dated 15.10.2024 & Notification dated
21.10.2024 for Gaon Panchayat and Zilla Parishad
Constituencies in Karimganj district.
Note- Petitioner is an unregistered association.
14 W.P.[C] no. 7029/2024 Notification dated 15.10.2024 and inclusion of
Chukabahi Village into Daipam Gaon Panchayat from
Baligaon Gaon Panchayat of Darrang district; direction
to retain of the said village in Baligaon Gaon Panchayat
as earlier; and direction not to proceed with election of
Baligaon & Daipam Gaon Panchayat till disposal of the
writ petition.
15 W.P.[C] no. 2/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 & Notification dated
21.10.2024 whereby Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik
Panchayat and Zilla Parishad constituencies under no.
116 Katigorah LAC of Cachar district are notified; and
direction to the District Delimitation Committee [DDC] to
delimit the Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and
Zilla Parishad constituencies by adhering, as far as
possible, to Article 243C of the Constitution of India r/w
Page 58 of 195
Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 by
conducting Public Hearing as per Clause 8 of the SOP.
16 W.P.[C] no. 34/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far it relates to Mahakal
Gaon Panchayat and consequential constitution of
Gaon Panchayat Wards of Mahakal Gaon Panchayat;
direction to constitute Mahakal Gaon Panchayat
excluding the area having no contiguity with the
erstwhile villages of Mahakal Gaon Panchayat; and
direction to reconstitute the Mahakal Gaon Panchayatby
excluding the area in order to maintain the population
ratio as provided under Section 5[1] of the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994.
17 W.P.[C] no. 40/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far inclusion of village
– Sonapur no. 1 within the newly constituted Adi Alengi
Gaon Panchayat; direction to retain the village Sonapur
no. 1 within its earlier Gaon Panchayat i.e. Sonapur
Gaon Panchayat; and direction not to conduct election
in respect of Sonapur no. 1 in terms of published voter
list.
18 W.P.[C] no. 42/2025 The inclusion of village – Sadarashi Pt-I within Ward no.
10 of Nayabari-Kesharkapan Gaon Panchayat ;
direction to retain village – Sadarashi Pt-I within
Sadarashi Gaon Panchayat; and direction not to conduct
election in respect of Nayabari-Kesharkapan Gaon
Panchayat and Sadarashi Gaon Panchayat in terms of
voter list.
19 W.P.[C] no. 43/2025 The Draft Voter Roll dated 11.12.2024 and Final Voter
List dated 28.12.2024 in respect of Ward no. 2 of South
Boyzeralga Gaon Panchayat under Dhubri district; and
direction to reconsider the boundary demarcation of
Page 59 of 195
Ward no. 3 by including the voters at Sl. nos. 1 to 431 in
Ward no. 3 in terms of Draft Voter List dated 11.12.2024
by excluding voters vide Sl. nos. 100 to 146, 163 to 379
and 803 to 1023 from the Ward no. 2 of Final Voter List
dated 18.12.2024 in respect of South Boyzeralga Gaon
Panchayat under Dhubri district.
20 W.P.[C] no. 48/2025 The Delimitation Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, dated
21.10.2024 and dated 11.11.2024 delimiting Gaon
Panchayat, Zilla Parishad and Gaon Panchayat
constituencies [Wards] in Sribhumi district; and the Final
Electoral Rolls dated 28.12.2024 stating it to be illegally
prepared.
Note- Petitioner is an unregistered association.
21 W.P.[C] no. 52/2025 Notification dated 16.10.2024 [Delimitation of Wards]
issued by District Commissioner, Cachar whereby
Badripar Gaon Panchayat under Banaskandi
Development Block at Village – Badripar has been newly
named and/or notified as the Head Quarter of
Gangapur-Badripar Gaon Panchayat under Rangpur
Development Block at Village – Gangapur and non-
consideration of representations, dated 24.10.2024.
22 W.P.[C] no. 101/2025 Notifications – dated 15.10.2024, dated 21.10.2024 and
dated 11.11.2024 – delimiting Gaon Panchayat, Zilla
Parishad and Gaon Panchayat constituencies [Wards]
in Sribhumi district, more particularly, Dargar Bond Gaon
Panchayat; and the Final Electoral Rolls dated
28.12.2024 stating it to be illegally prepared.
23 W.P.[C] no. 102/2025 Notificaions dated 15.10.2024, dated 21.10.2024 and
dated 11.11.2024 delimiting Gaon Panchayat, Zilla
Parishad and Gaon Panchayat constituencies [Wards]
Page 60 of 195
inSribhumi district, more particularly, Lamajuar and
Kalachand Gaon Panchayats of Karimganj district; and
the Final Electoral Rolls dated 28.12.2024 stating it to be
illegally prepared.
Note- petitioner is an unregistered society/organisation.
24 W.P.[C] no. 109/2025 Composition/constitution of Gaon Panchayat wards of
Bangalmora Gaon Panchayat, and direction to
reconstitute Gaon Panchayat wards of the said Gaon
Panchayat by maintaining contiguity as well as the
population ratio; direction to exclude the part of
Doulatpur from the jurisdiction of no. 3 Tinthengia-
Doulatpur Gaon Panchayat ward; and direction to select
Tinthengia L.P. School/Tinthengia H.S. as polling station
of no.3 Tinthengia-Doulatpur Gaon Panchayat Ward
instead of Doulatput H.S.
25 W.P.[C] no. 117/2025 The Final Voter List of no. 6 Akashiganga Gaon
Panchayat published on 28.12.2024; direction to
arrange the names of the voters in accordance with their
earlier Gaon Panchayat Wards before delimitation of
Gaon Panchayat Wards; and direction not proceed with
Panchayat Elections.
26 W.P.[C] no. 131/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 in respect of Gagalmari
Gaon Panchayat within Laharighat LAC, whereby 5 nos.
of villages were excluded from the said Gaon Panchayat
and included Merorhabi and Kacharigaon in Hoiborgaon
Gaon Panchayat and no. 1 Gagalmari and no. 2
Gagalmari villages in Lehphati Gaon Panchayat, and
Kacharigaon village in Boralimari Gaon Panchayat in
violation of SOP dated 03.08.2024; and thereby to make
necessary corrections in the Final List in respect of
Page 61 of 195
exclusion of 5 nos. of villages and to include them within
Gagalmari Gaon Panchayat.
27 W.P.[C] no. 376/2025 Notification dated 21.10.2024; and direction for fresh
delimitation of Zilla Parishad constituencies in Sribhumi
district; and direction not to effect election process in
Zilla Parishad, Gaon Panchayat and other bodies till
disposal of the writ petition.
28 W.P.[C] no. 641/2025 Composition/constitution of Gaon Panchayat wards of
Sonapur Gaon Panchayat; and consequential electoral
rolls of Gaon Panchayat wards; and direction to
reconstitute the Gaon Panchayat Wards of Sonapur
Gaon Panchayat by maintaining contiguity and
population ratio amongst all wards of said Gaon
Panchayat.
29 W.P.[C] no. 809/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far as inclusion of
village – Chitalmari within Pramila Gaon Panchayat and
the electoral rolls of village – Chitalmari prepared in
terms of the Notification dated 15.10.2024; and direction
to include the village within the newly created Juripar
Gaon Panchayat or within the nearest Madhabpara
Gaon Panchayat.
30 W.P.[C] no. 927/2025 Composition/ constitution of Gaon Panchayat Wards of
Bagalajan Gaon Panchayat; and consequential electoral
rolls of all wards of the said Gaon Panchayat; and
direction to reconstitute the Gaon Panchayat Wards of
Bagalajan Gaon Panchayat by maintaining equality and
uniformity of voters amongst all Wards of said Gaon
Panchayat.
31 W.P.[C] no. 934/2025 Composition/ constitution of Gaon Panchayat Wards of
Gerjaipam Gaon Panchayat; and consequential
Page 62 of 195
electoral rolls of all wards of the said Gaon Panchayat;
and direction to reconstitute the Gaon Panchayat Wards
of Gerjaipam Gaon Panchayat by maintaining equality
and uniformity of voters amongst all wards of said Gaon
Panchayat.
32 W.P.[C] no. 1010/2025 Notification dated 15.10.2024 so far as inclusion of
village – Kaziranga and village – Balisara within
Madhabpara Gaon Panchayat and the electoral rolls of
said villages prepared in terms of the impugned
Notiification; and direction to retain the village –
Kaziranga and village – Madhabpara within Gerjaipam
Gaon Panchayat.
13. As in the other writ petitions also, similar factual foundations, more or less, have
been sought to be laid, the same are not delineated in detail as the same would
only lendmore towards volume, than in substance.
III. The nature and scope of the assail :-
14. During the course of the hearing of the batch of writ petitions, the learned
counsel for the contesting parties are at consensus ad idem that they would be
addressing mainly on legal issues, that is, on the legality and the validity of the
exercise undertaken for delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats
and Zilla Parishads and their constituencies qua the constitutional provisions
contained in Part-IX of the Constitution of India; the statutory provisions
contained in the Delimitation Act, 2002; the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as
amended; the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] notified by the Notification
dated 03.08.2024; and the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024. In few writ petitions,
the delimitation of Zilla Parishad Constituences along with their corresponding
Gaon Panchayats made vide Notification dated 21.10.2024 and delimitation of
Gaon Pachayat constituencies [Wards] have been subjected to challenge.
Page 63 of 195
IV. The stand of the respondents in the pleadings :-
15. A number of affidavits-in-opposition and additional affidavits-in-opposition have
been filed on behalf of the State respondents. It has been submitted on behalf
of the State respondents that the stand of the State Government is, more or less,
delineated in the affidavit-in-opposition and the additional affidavit-in-opposition
filed in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5346 of 2024. Taking the writ petition,
W.P.[C] no. 5346 of 2024, which is the first one to be instituted in point of time
in this batch of writ petitions, as the lead writ petition and in view of such stance
taken on behalf of the State respondents, this Court would mainly refer to the
statements, averments and contentions made in the said affidavit-in-opposition
and the additional affidavit-in-opposition in order to find out the projected case
of the State respondents.
16. It has been stated that it has become imperative for the Government of Assam
to carry out the process of delimitation of Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats
and Gaon Panchayats and reorganisation of Development Blocks in the State
following the delimitation of Legislative Assembly Constituencies [LACs] of the
State as per the Election Commission of India [ECI]’s Order published vide
Notification no. 282/AS/2023[DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023. It is stated that the
delimitation of the Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon Panchayats
and reorganisation of the Development Blocks involved redrawing of the
boundaries to ensure equitable representation and efficient governance. It has
been aimed at ensuring geographical contiguity and compactness of the areas
concerned which would also pave the way for administrative efficiency,
decentralization, electoral equity, better region-wise planning and more
equitable allocation of Government funds, etc. in tune with the changing
demographics and administrative needs. Taking into purview all these factors,
the State Cabinet in its meeting, held on 19.06.2024, decided to take up the
process of delimitation of Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon
Page 64 of 195
Panchayats and accordingly, the Notification no. E-449396/18 dated 03.08.2024
was issued by the Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Government of
Assam framing the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] for delimitation of Zilla
Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon Panchayats wherein criteria were
mentioned for a systematic and efficient process of delimitation.
17. It has been stated that after the Notification dated 03.08.2024, District
Delimitation Commissions [DDCs] were constituted under Section 3A of the
Assam Panchayat Act, as amended. LAC-level Task Forces were also proposed
for delimitation of Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats; and also for Gaon
Panchayats and Development Blocks reorganisation to execute the delimitation
and reorganisation process at the LAC-level, as per Clause 7 of the SOP, notified
by the Notification dated 03.08.2024. On constitution of the LAC-level Task
Forces, the works for delimitation and reorganisation process commenced.
Though it was proposed in the Notification dated 03.08.2024 that the
delimitation process would be finalized by 17.09.2024, the time-lines proposed
in the Notification dated 03.08.2024 were modified and extended by a
Notification dated 05.09.2024 issued by the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department, Government of Assam as an Addendum and as per the Addendum,
the date for issuance of final notification was proposed as 27.09.2024.
18. It has been stated that as per the time-lines proposed, public hearings were held
LAC-wise from 23.09.2024 to 25.09.2024. The hearings were taken up by LAC-
wise Hearing Committees, chaired by the respective Additional District
Commissioners. It is stated that in so far as the Cachar District is concerned, the
LAC-wise Hearing Committees were constituted vide an Order bearing Memo no.
CZP.71/Delimitation & Block Reorg./2024-25 dated 20.09.2024 to hold hearings
on the representations / suggestions / objections received from individuals, civil
society organizations and recognized political parties in connection with Draft
Delimitation Notification published on 17.09.2024. By the Order dated
20.09.2024, the date, time & venue of public hearings for the seven Legislative
Page 65 of 195
Assembly Constituencies [LACs] within Cachar District were fixed. As per the
Order dated 20.09.2024, public hearings for Sonai LAC was held from 10-30 a.m.
to 04-00 p.m. from 23.09.2024 to 25.09.2024 at the Office Chamber of the
Additional District Commissioner, Cachar within the office premises of the District
Commissioner, Cachar.
19. It has been averred with regard to the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5346 of 2024
that the writ petitioners therein along with several other persons submitted their
objections against the Draft Delimitation Notification by a Representation dated
18.09.2024 and the writ petitioners also physically participated in the public
hearing on 23.09.2024. During the public hearing on 23.09.2024, the writ
petitioners had placed their objections / grievances. After hearing the petitioners,
the Representation was rejected by the Hearing Committee, Sonai LAC stating,
inter-alia, that ‘The hearing of the petitioners was taken. It has been observed
in the Draft Delimitation that the entire process was carried out keeping in mind
of public convenience and well-structured administrative conducive in the
District. The petition is rejected as the Draft Delimitation is carried out as per
geographical structure, communication and public convenience, contiguity of the
areas, density of population and existing administrative units.’
20. The State respondents have responded to the contentions made in the writ
petition, W.P.[C] no. 5346 of 2024 to the effect that the total nos. of Gaon
Panchayats under Sonai Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC] in Cachar
District were 24 [twenty-four] earlier and consequent to the delimitation
exercise, it got reduced to 18 [eighteen] resulting in decrease of 6 [six] Gaon
Panchayats and it violated Clause 4[ii] of the SOP dated 03.08.2024.To respond,
the State respondents have referred to Clause 4[ii] of the SOP, which provided
that ‘the number of Gaon Panchayats in the district shall remain same as that of
the current number of Gaon Panchayats in the district after LAC delimitation.’ It
is mentioned that prior to delimitation and after delimitation, the total number
of Gaon Panchayats in Cachar District have remained same. It has been asserted
Page 66 of 195
on behalf of the State respondents that the criteria provided for delimitation of
Gaon Panchayats in Clause 4 of the SOP had been diligently followed while
conducting the delimitation exercise.
21. It is further stated that after completion of public hearings, the relevant records
were submitted before the Commissioner, Panchayat & Rural Development
Department, Assam for their onward transmission to the Government in the
Panchayat & Rural Development Department. The State Cabinet had, thereafter,
in its meeting, held on 08.10.2024, approved the proposal for publication of the
Notification of the Final Draft of Delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, etc.
Accordingly, the State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department notified the Gaon Panchayats within Cachar District vide a
Notification no. PDA.4/2024/GP/8 dated 15.10.2024 on the basis of the data,
justification and records received. Subsequently, the Notification dated
15.10.2024 was published in the Assam Gazette in Issue no. 526 dated
24.10.2024. It is also the stand of the State respondents that for the other
districts also, similar process was followed and thereafter, notifications were
issued and published in the Assam Gazette.
22. It has been alluded that the delimitation process was carried out by maintaining
contiguity considering the population density, geographical accessibility,
administrative convenience, communication and public convenience, contiguity
of the areas and other relevant factors so as not to affect the objects of rural
self-governance envisaged in Part-IX of the Constitution. It is the stance of the
State respondents that the entire process was carried out as per the SOP
formulated vide the Notification dated 03.08.2024 and the Addendum dated
05.09.2024. It is also the stand of the State respondents that the delimitation
process was carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended, and the constitutional provisions. The writ
petitioners were given enough opportunity to place their objections/grievances/
suggestions before the Hearing Committees. Their objections were duly
Page 67 of 195
consideredand the relevant records bear testimony to that effect. It has been
pleaded to the effect that the writ petitioners in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no.
5346 of 2024 did not raise any plea as regards non-adherence of the proviso to
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, during/at the public
hearing, before raising such a plea in the writ petition.
23. It has been averred and asserted that the entire delimitation exercise had been
conducted as per the provisions of the Constitution of India, the Assam
Panchayat Act, as amended, and the Rules that govern the procedure of
delimitation and there was no violation of or disregard to the norms/law/rules/
factors in conducting the delimitation exercise. It has been mentioned that a
decision was taken at the Government level not to increase the total number of
Gaon Panchayats in the State for the delimitation exercise to be carried out after
the Cabinet Decision dated 19.06.2024. The reason cited for taking such a
decision is that if the population norms fixed for the categorization of districts as
per Section 5[1] were to be followed, it would have led to contradiction of the
Government’s decision of not increasing the total number of Gaon Panchayats in
the State. Further, it would have borne additional financial liabilities upon the
State. The delimitation exercise was therefore, carried out without the districts
being categorized under Category-‘A’ or Category-‘B’ or Category-‘C’ as per their
population density. Accordingly, the delimitation exercise was carried out in
Cachar District without categorizing the district as per population density. As the
State had decided not to increase the number of Gaon Panchayats as a whole,
the boundaries of the Gaon Panchayats have been restricted within the relevant
districts. In view of the same, there arose no necessity to categorize the districts
as per the proviso to sub-section [1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act,
as amended, as there was no proposal to change the number of Gaon
Panchayats in the existing districts. It is further stated that it is not required to
classify the districts and hence, the districts were not notified category-wise.
Page 68 of 195
24. It has been further stated that since the final Delimitation Notification had
already been published in the Assam Gazette in Issue no. 526 dated 24.10.2024,
it is not open to challenge. It is stated that due to the delimitation exercise and
reorganisation of constituencies, the rural populace are not deprived of their
rights of franchise; participation in electoral and decision-making process or from
any of the benefits, which are schematized for them by the State.
25. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 4, that is, the District
Commissioner, Cachar in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5631/2024, it is averred
that the details of delimitation process, to be carried out systematically and
efficiently by the District Delimitation Commissions, were mentioned in the
Notification dated 03.08.2024 and the delimitation process was undertaken
keeping in view geographical contiguity and compactness of the areas concerned
which would pave the way for administrative efficiency, decentralization,
electoral equity, better region-wise planning and more equitable allocation of
Government funds, etc. in tune with the changing demographics and
administrative needs and also the population status of the villages in the Census
2001.
26. It has further been stated that a Notification dated 20.09.2024 was issued
pursuant to the Addendum Notification dated 05.09.2024 to constitute LAC-wise
Hearing Committees for hearing the representations/suggestions/ objections
from individuals, civil society organizations, etc. in connection with the Draft
Delimitation Notification published on 17.09.2024 for the Cachar district. The writ
petitioners submitted a Representation dated 18.09.2024 stating inter-alia that
the total nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Sonai LAC was reduced from twenty-four
to eighteen and on the contrary, the number of Gaon Panchayats in all the other
LACs of the district were enhanced. In view of the said Representation, the writ
petitioners were called for public hearing before the District Delimitation
Commission and hearing was conducted as per Clause 8 of the SOP on
23.09.2024. The petitioners participated in the said hearing and put forth their
Page 69 of 195
objections and demands, mentioned in the affidavit. After hearing the objections
and demands of the petitioners and also recording their oral submissions, the
signatures of the writ petitioners were taken in the attendance sheet. It is stated
that after duly considering the objections, the petitioners’ Representation was
rejected stating, inter-alia, that ‘the hearing of the petitioners was done. It has
been observed in the Draft Delimitation that the entire process was carried out
keeping in the mind public convenience and well-structured administrative
conducive in the District. The petition is rejected as the Draft Delimitation is
carried out as per geographical structure, communication and public
convenience, contiguity of the areas, density of population and existing
administrative units’. It is stated that public hearings were held LAC-wise from
23.09.2024 to 25.09.2024. It is further stated that Representations which were
received during 18.09.2024 to 20.09.2024, were taken into consideration by the
District Delimitation Commission. It is stated that the fact that the
objections/grievances/suggestions received were duly considered by the District
Delimitation Commission is duly reflected in the records. The final Delimitation
Notification was published on 15.10.2024 following the procedure mentioned in
the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] for delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats/Anchalik Panchayats/Zilla Parishads and Block reorganization. It is
further stated that the delimitation exercise was done keeping in view the
population density as per village population census and also as per geographical
accessibility, contiguity and administrative convenience, after adequate public
consultations. The Delimitation Notification has been published in the Assam
Gazette in Issue no. 526 dated 24.10.2024.
V. Submissions on behalf of the petitioners :-
27. From the petitioners’ sides, submissions are advanced mainly by Mr. H.R.A.
Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, Mr. A.H.M.R.
Choudhury and Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in
some of the writ petitions; Mr. A.C. Borbora, learned Senior Counsel with Mr.
Page 70 of 195
A.K. Talukdar, learned counsel for some of the other writ petitioners; and Mr.
P.K. Roychoudhury with Mr. H.I. Choudhury, learned counsel for few other writ
petitioners. Also heard Mr. A.J. Atia, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C]
no. 117/2025; Mr. A. Alam, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C] no.
131/2025; Mr. M.K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C] no.
5613/2024; Ms. S.K. Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C] no.
5706/2024; Mr. R.C. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C] no.
52/2025; Ms. L. Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C] no.
376/2025; and Mr. A.M. Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.[C]
no. 5810/2024.
28. Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in some of
the writ petitions has submitted that the prescription contained in sub-section
[1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, amended vide the Assam Panchayat
[Amendment] Act, 2023, is a condition precedent, which is mandatorily required
to be followed for carrying out a delimitation process, contemplated by the
Assam Panchayat Act. He has contended that the districts in the State of Assam
are to be categorized on the basis of population density or any other relevant
factor. Elucidating further, he has submitted that all the districts are to be
categorized in three categories, that is, Category-‘A’, Category-‘B’ and Category-
‘C’ in terms of the proviso to sub-section [1] of Section 5. He has contended that
from a reading of sub-section [1] of Section 5 and the proviso thereto, it would
emerge that categorization of the districts should be an event preceding to the
declaration, by notification, of any area to be a Gaon Panchayat in terms of sub-
section [1] of Section 5.
28.1. Mr. Choudhury has further contended that after categorizing the districts in
Category-‘A’, Category-‘B’ and Category-‘C’ respectively, the Gaon Panchayats
are to be constituted according to the population range set forth in Clause [a],
Clause [b] and Clause [c] respectively, as indicated in the proviso to sub-section
[1] of Section 5. The same is also evident from Clause 4[x] of the SOP. But, the
Page 71 of 195
State respondents did not undertake such an exercise prior to proceeding with
the delimitation process.
28.2. It is the further contention of Mr. Choudhury that while undertaking the
purported delimitation process, the constitutional provisions contained in Part-IX
of the Constitution have been ignored by the State respondents. He has
contended that the condition laid down in the proviso to Clause [1] of Article
243C and Clause [2] of Article 234C have been given a go-by by the State
respondents. He has submitted that it is a constitutional requirement to maintain
the same ratio between the population of the territorial area of a Panchayat at
any level and the number of seats in such Panchayat to be filled by election. It
is also a constitutional requirement that each Panchayat area shall be divided
into territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio between the
population of each territory and the number of seats allotted to it shall be the
same throughout the Panchayat area.
28.3. Mr. Choudhury has also contended that the provisions contained in Article 243O
in Part-IX and Article 329 of Part-XV of the Constitution are similarly worded. He
has submitted that the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the
Constitution is available to examine the validity of any delimitation process and
if any action taken in the process of delimitation is found to be manifestly
arbitrary and incongruent to the constitutional principles, a constitutional court
can certainly exercise its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the
Constitution to rectify the situation. It is his contention that since the process of
delimitation undertaken by the State respondents in the case in hand is an act
demonstrating ex-facie arbitrary exercise of power it is available for the court to
pass appropriate writ or direction for the greater interest of a democratic process
of election.
28.4. It is further contended by Mr. Choudhury that subsequent to the amendments
carried out in the Assam Panchayat Act, by the Assam Panchayat [Amendment]
Page 72 of 195
Act, 2023, the corresponding amendments required to be carried out
simultaneously in the Assam Panchayat [Constitution] Rules, 1995 are not carried
out to bring them in conformity with the amended statutory provisions.
29. Mr. Borbora, learned Senior Counsel appearing for some of the other writ
petitioners in this batch of writ petitions has referred to the provisions
incorporated in Section 3A and Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, apart
from the relevant constitutional provisions contained in Part-IX of the
Constitution. He has also referred to the various clauses in the Standard
Operating Procedure [SOP] laid down in the Notification dated 03.08.2024.
While, on one hand, it was declared that the SOP had delineated the steps and
strategies to be employed for delimitation of the Panchayats at all three levels
for ensuring a systematic and efficient process of delimitation, the State
respondents have, on the other hand, failed to follow the same in letter and
spirit. He has contended that the State respondents themselves have not
adhered to the criteria for delimitation of Gaon Panchayats.
29.1. Articulating on Article 243B and Article 243C, Mr. Borbora has submitted that it
is a constitutional requirement to maintain the same ratio at two stages, firstly,
the ratio between the population of the territorial area of a Panchayat at any
level of the three levels and the number of seats in each of such Panchayats to
be filled by election; and secondly, the ratio between the population of each
constituency in each Panchayat area and the number of seats allotted to it,
following the proviso to Clause [1] and Clause [2] respectively of Article 243C.
29.2. Mr. Borbora has further contended that it is the District Delimitation Commission
constituted under Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act, which has been
entrusted with the responsibility to decide about the sizes of constituencies of
Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad. In a process of
delimitation, re-sizing or re-shuffling of Panchayat areas and population size of
each Panchayat at all three levels are required. In the recently undertaken
Page 73 of 195
delimitation process, the State respondents were duty-bound to distinguish the
districts of Assam into three categories at first, as mandated in the proviso to
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. Admittedly, such categorization of
districts was never done by the State respondents before proceeding with the
delimitation exercise and such action has clearly violated the constitutional
provisions as well as the statutory provisions contained in the Assam Panchayat
Act. He has cited the example of Karimganj district to buttress his such
submission. Bringing to notice that the district of Karimganj is one of the districts
having the highest population density at 557 as against the State population
density of 340, he has contended that the Gaon Panchayats in the district of
Karimganj should have been constituted with the population range from 10200
to 13800 in terms of the proviso to Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act,
after amendment. But, the State respondents have failed to follow the said
mandate, which, according to him, is mandatory in nature. It is his contention
that the word, ‘may’ appearing in Section 5[1] is to be taken as a mandatory
prescription. On relevance and importance of a proviso to a Section, Mr. Borbora
has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S. Sundaram Pillai
and others vs. V.R. Pattabiraman and others, [1985] 1 SCC 591.
29.3. Mr. Borbora has further submitted, by referring to the Delimitation Report of the
Election Commission of India [ECI] on LAC Delimitation, that the ECI while
carrying out the delimitation of Lok Sabha Constituencies and the Legislative
Assembly Constituencies [LACs] in the State of Assam had given due regard to
the factors like geographical features, density of population, means of
communication, public convenience, contiguity of the areas, etc. But, in the
Panchayat delimitation exercise, due regards were not given to such relevant
factors and such action on the part of the State authorities is clearly falling short
of the constitutional as well as the statutory postulates.
30. Mr. Roychoudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in few other
writ petitions has submitted that in the recent Panchayat delimitation process,
Page 74 of 195
the exercise was not carried out by constituting the District Delimitation
Commission as per the mandate of Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act as
well as Section 3 of the Delimitation Act, 2002. Section 3 of the Delimitation Act,
2002 specifically speaks about constitution of the District Delimitation
Commission by mentioning the Chairman, Member-Secretary and Member. In
the Panchayat delimitation exercise under reference, no such District
Delimitation Commission has been constituted in the entire State by naming the
persons with whom the District Delimitation Commissions were constituted. It is
his contention that the Central Government has been constituting Delimitation
Commission time to time. The Central Government had constituted a Delimitation
Commission for delimitation of Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly
Constituencies vide a Gazette Notification dated 12.07.2002. Another
Delimitation Commission for the State of Jammu and Kashmir was constituted
by the Central Government on 06.03.2020 as per the mandate of Section 3 of
the Delimitation Act, 2002. Since the provision of Section 3 of the Delimitation
Act, 2002 is pari materia to Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act, it was
incumbent on the part of the State Government to constitute District Delimitation
Commission in each district for the purpose of delimitation of constituencies at
each level of the Panchayat.
30.1. He has further contended that the State Government before carrying out the
delimitation exercise, ought to have categorized the districts having the highest
density of population, the districts having medium density of population and the
districts having lowest density of population as Category-‘A’, Category-‘B’ and
Category-‘C’ respectively, as per the mandate contained in the proviso to Section
5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. But, in the instant case, no such categorization
of districts was made by the Delimitation Commission before carrying out the
delimitation exercise.
30.2. Another contention of Mr. Roychoudhury is that both the words, ‘may’, appearing
in Section 5[1], and ‘shall’ appearing in the proviso to Section 5[1], of the Assam
Page 75 of 195
Panchayat Act, after amendment, are to be construed as mandatory. He has
submitted that the word, ‘may’ appearing in Section 5[1] is to be read as ‘shall’,
meaning thereby, it is mandatory on the part of the State Government to follow
the provisions of Section 5[1] in a delimitation process. The categorization of
districts prescribed in the first proviso to Section 5[1] is required to be carried
out before or, at least, simultaneously. He has placed a point that both the words,
‘may’ and ‘shall’ have to be read as mandatory and the proviso to Section 5[1]
is part and parcel of the main enacting provision. Mr. Roychoudhury has referred
to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Shah Bhojraj Kuverji
Oil Mills and Ginning Factory vs. Subbash Chandra Yograj Sinha, AIR 1961
SC 1596,to submit that to understand the role of the enacting part and the
proviso, a fair construction of the proviso is required. He has further referred to
the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Tramways Co. Ltd. vs.
Corporation of Calcutta, AIR 1965 SC 1728 .
30.3. Mr. Roychoudhury has submitted that Article 243C has mandated that the State
Legislature shall make laws for composition of Gaon Panchayats in their
respective States. However, such power of the State Legislature to make laws
has been conditioned by the proviso incorporated in Article 243C of the
Constitution. The said proviso has provided that while determining the size of
the Panchayats in State, the ratio between the population of the territorial area
of a Panchayat at any level and number of seats in such Panchayat to be filled
up by election, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the State. He has
advanced a contention that in Assam, this constant ratio in the delimitation
exercise has neither been decided nor been maintained while determining the
size of the Gaon Panchayats in different districts. The Assam State Election
Commission [ASEC] and the State Government have failed to disclose to the
public by notification and/or administrative circular the constant ratio calculated
as per mandate of Article 243C[1] of the Constitution.
Page 76 of 195
30.4. Mr. Roychoudhury has pointed out that the delimitation notification had been
published by the State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department in exercise of power conferred by sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the
Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, on 15.10.2024. It is his further contention
that the delimitation notification could not have been published without following
the mandatory requirement of Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as
amended. He has further submitted that as per Clause 9 of the SOP, the final
delimitation process of Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad
and notification of the same is to be published by the District Delimitation
Commission and not by the State Government. But, in the delimitation process
under reference, the delimitation notification has been published by the
Government of Assam in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department and
not by the District Delimitation Commission and the same is in violation of the
SOP framed on 03.08.2024.
30.5. Mr. Roychoudhury has further submitted that the claims and objections were
heard by the officials like the Additional District Commissioner, the Circle Officer,
the Block Development Officer, etc. and not by the members of the District
Delimitation Commission. The petitioners are also aggrieved by the fact that the
District Delimitation Commission has not given any justification before minimizing
the number of Gaon Panchayat seats in Sonai LAC from 24 to 18 and while doing
so, no public opinion was obtained before taking such decision. It is his
contention that though the District Delimitation Commission maintained total
number of Gaon Panchayat seats in Cachar district as earlier, it has, at the same
time, increased the number of seats in other LACs while decreasing the number
of seats in Sonai LAC. Mr. Roychoudhury has also submitted a written synopsis
of his submissions.
30.6. Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel has submitted that use of the word, ‘may’ in a
statutory provision is not to be accepted, by itself, that the provision is directory
in nature. Whether the word, ‘may’ is to be treated as a directory provision or a
Page 77 of 195
mandatory provision is dependent upon various factors, more particularly, the
object and scheme of the statute and the background in connection with which
the word is used. He has submitted that since the process of delimitation of
constituencies of the Gaon Panchayats has been indicated specifically in Section
5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, and there is no other process for
delimitation of constituencies indicated in the statute, the word, ‘may’ appearing
in sub-section [1] of Section 5 has to be construed as mandatory and as a
consequence, the proviso to sub-section [1] of Section 5 because of the word,
‘shall’ appearing therein is also to be treated as mandatory. He has referred to
the decision in Bachahan Devi and another vs. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur and
another, reported in [2008] 12 SCC 372.
31. The other learned counsels appearing for the petitioners have adopted the
submissions advanced by Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Borbora, Mr. Roychoudhury and
Mr. Talukdar which have already been limned in the preceding paragraphs.
32. On the scope of judicial review in matters of such kind, the decisions in Meghraj
Kothari vs. Delimitation Commission and others, AIR 1967 SC 669; Dravida
Munnetra Kazhagam [DMK] vs. Secretary, Governor‘s Secretariat and
others, [2020] 6 SCC 548; State of Goa and another vs. Fouziya Imtiaz
Shaikh and another, [2021] 8 SCC 401; and Kishorchandra Chhaganlal
Rathod vs. Union of India and others, 2024 INSC 579, have been referred to
by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
33. With the above contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners have
submitted that the entire process of delimitation of Gaon Panchayats is arbitrary
and in breach of the constitutional provisions in Part-IX and the statutory
prescriptions contained in the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, and other
statutes and is an action demonstrating arbitrary and colourable exercise of
power. Canvassing the above points, the learned counsel for the petitioners have
submitted that the delimitation carried out after the Notification dated
Page 78 of 195
03.08.2024 and the subsequent Notifications dated 15.10.2024 and other
consequential notifications, of the Panchayat & Rural Development Department,
Government of Assam are liable to be set aside and quashed and a direction to
the State respondents is clearly called for to carry out a delimitation process
afresh strictly in conformity with the provisions contained in sub-section [1] of
Section 5 and the proviso thereto of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, to
satisfy the constitutional mandate contained in Part-IX of the Constitution and in
the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended.
VI. Submissions on behalf of the State respondents:-
34. Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam with Mr. K. Konwar, learned
Additional Advocate General, Assam & Senior Standing Counsel, Panchayat and
Rural Development Department; and Mr. R. Dubey, learned Standing Counsel,
Assam State Election Commission [ASEC]; have advanced submissions for the
respondents.
35. Mr. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam has submitted that in the batch of
writ petitions, no challenge has been made to the criteria formulated in the
Standard Operating Procedure [SOP], as mentioned in the Notification dated
03.08.2024. It is the procedure, which was followed during the process
subsequent to the publication of the SOP, which has been put to challenge. He
has submitted that the procedure followed and steps taken for delimitation,
according to the petitioners, were not as per the SOP. He has submitted that the
SOP had delineated the steps to be followed for delimitation of the Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in the State of Assam and
Development Block reorganisation so that the constitutional principles and the
statutory provisions contained in the relevant statutes like the Assam Panchayat
Act, etc. could be duly adhered to in the course of the delimitation of Panchayats
at the three levels. The SOP was in the nature of procedural guidelines and since
Page 79 of 195it did not, otherwise, have any statutory force, it cannot be said that it is
enforceable.
35.1. Mr. Saikia has further submitted that in the process of delimitation of Panchayats
at the three levels, which commenced with the Notification dated 03.08.2024
resulted in issuance of the Notifications dated 15.10.2024 and other subsequent
notifications, where the constitutional provisions as well as all the statutory
provisions were kept in consideration and were adhered to.
35.2. He has pointed out that while undertaking the exercise, the Election Commission
of India [ECI]’s Notification dated 11.08.2023 was duly taken as the source of
Gaon Panchayats and villages falling in a Legislative Assembly Constituency
[LAC]. He has submitted that the nos. of Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPCs]
district-wise were to be notified in conformity with the provisions of Section
65[1][i] of the Assam Panchayat Act and following Clause 6 of the SOP. Similarly,
in conformity with the provisions of Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act, it
was made clear in Clause 5 of the SOP and the Notification dated 03.08.2024
that reorganization of Development Blocks would automatically delimit the
Anchalik Panchayats. He has further submitted that there is no challenge from
the petitioners to the delimitation process undertaken in respect of delimitation
of Zilla Parishads/Zilla Parishad Constituencies and the Anchalik Panchayats/
Anchalik Panchayat Constituencies, though their delimitation processes are
directly connected with the delimitation process of Gaon Panchayats. He has
further contended that the entire process of delimitation of Panchayats at all
three levels and Block reorganization have to be considered together and the
delimitation of only Gaon Panchayats can not be considered in isolation to
examine the challenge.
35.3. Learned Advocate General, Assam has contended that the only challenge from
the petitioners is to the delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats, which is the third-
tier in the Panchayati Raj Institutional structure, and that all the grounds of
Page 80 of 195
challenge to the delimitation process of the Gaon Panchayats are on the basis of
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. It is submitted by him that such
challenge made on the basis of Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act is a
misconceived one for misconstruing the provisions of Section 5[1] and the
proviso thereto of the Assam Panchayat Act by the petitioners.
35.4. It is the contention of the learned Advocate General, Assam that the provisions
contained in sub-section [1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act is not the
only procedure for the State Government to carry out delimitation of Panchayats.
There are other procedure laid down in the Assam Panchayat Act including
Section 5[2] for determination of Gaon Panchayats and their constituencies and
the State Government had the option not to follow the procedure under Section
5[1]. After due deliberation, the State Government took a conscious decision not
to follow the procedure outlined in Section 5[1] and decided to carry out the
exercise with the other statutory provisions and not to follow the procedure
provided in Section 5[1] by issuing any notification. It is in such view of the
matter, the stand that there has been no categorization of districts is taken in
the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the State respondents in these cases.
35.5. He has further submitted that if the clauses – Clause 4[ii], Clause 4[iv], Clause
4[v], Clause 4[viii] & Clause 4[ix] – are looked at, it would emerge that the
clauses mentioned about situations after LAC Delimitation, which was completed
by the Election Commission of India [ECI] with the publication of the Delimitation
Order in the Notification dated 11.08.2023, as indicated specifically in Clause
4[i]. He has submitted that from the pleadings in the writ petitions itself, it would
emerge that the nos. of Gaon Panchayats in a district have remained same before
LAC Delimitation and after LAC Delimitation and it is a fact which can be
established from the verifiable data. It is not the case of any of the petitioners
that Clause 4[ii] of the SOP has been violated and not adhered to. In fact, the
petitioners in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5346/2024 have themselves stated
that after the delimitation process, the total nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Cachar
Page 81 of 195
district have remained the same. The grievance of the petitioners therein is that
after the delimitation process, the nos. of Gaon Panchayats in Sonai LAC have
been reduced from earlier twenty-four to eighteen and the remaining six Gaon
Panchayats have been added to other LACs of Cachar district. He has submitted
that such increase of nos. of Gaon Panchayats in one LAC and/or increase of
Gaon Panchayats in another LAC is also attributable to LAC delimitation and Block
reorganization given effect to vide the Notification dated 11.08.2023.
35.6. It is the further contention that there is no specific challenge to the effect that
while undertaking the delimitation and reorganization exercise, the procedure
delineated in either Clause 4[iii] or in Clause 4[iv] of the SOP was not followed.
He has submitted that if the areas of a Gaon Panchayat, after LAC Delimitation,
are found falling in more than one LAC then, as a consequence, the villages
under the respective LACs may have to be grouped together to form a new Gaon
Panchayat or may have to be accommodated in nearby existing Gaon Panchayat
by following Clause 4[ii] of the SOP and it is keeping such situation into
consideration, Clause 4[v] was incorporated in the SOP.
35.7. Mr. Saikia has further submitted that if by following Clause 4[v], a new Gaon
Panchayat is to be formed, there is no bar to form a new Gaon Panchayat by
taking the factors adumbrated in Clause 4[vi] of the SOP into purview. It is open
for the State Government to take such steps without issuance of any notification
under Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act as the State Government also
has the powers under Section 5[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act. He has
contended that Chapter-V : ‘Establishment and Constitution of Gaon Panchayat’
of the Assam Panchayat Act has provided two options, independent and separate
from each other, to the State Government for establishment and constitution of
a Gaon Panchayat in Section 5[1]; and Section 5[2] along with other statutory
provisions respectively.
Page 82 of 195
35.8. Mr. Saikia has submitted that the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 has been enacted
after insertion of Part-IX in the Constitution and Panchayats at three levels –
village, intermediate & district – had been established already after enactment
of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. Thus, in case Gaon Panchayats have already
been established, the Government may, by a notification, include or exclude any
village or any local area or part of it from such already established Gaon
Panchayats at any time in exercise of the power conferred by Section 5[2] of the
Assam Panchayat Act. The State Government is not, therefore,be required to
issue a Notification to establish a Gaon Panchayat in exercise of the power under
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. In the process of delimitation of Gaon
Panchayat, areas are also readjusted following the changes effected by the Order
dated 11.08.2023 by the ECI, which was notified and gazetted on 11.08.2023.
35.9. Mr. Saikia has further referred to the delimitation process undertaken by the ECI
for Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the State of Assam. He has
submitted, by referring to the Delimitation Report published by ECI after LAC
Delimitation, that the ECI while undertaking the delimitation exercise, had taken
into account the Census figures of 2001, as published by the Census
Commissioner, alone for the purpose of delimitation. The ECI decided to delimit
the constituencies having regard to the administrative units, that is,
District/Development Block/Panchayat or VCDC [Village Council Development
Committee]/Village/ Ward, etc., as in existence on 01.01.2023. The process of
delimitation for Gaon Panchayats was further on the basis of the Order dated
11.08.2023, as referred to in Clause 4[i] of the SOP, for source of Gaon
Panchayat and villages falling in an LAC. It is for the said reason, the SOP
mentioned that the LAC-wise list of Villages and the respective Gaon Panchayats’
names, as notified by the ECI in LAC Delimitation, would be collected and after
collecting them, the respective Gaon Panchayats would be assigned against each
village. It was further indicated in the SOP that the final delimitation process of
Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad would be completed with
issuance of a notification by District Delimitation Commission. Mr. Saikia has
Page 83 of 195
pointed out that after issuance of the Notification dated 15.10.2024 by the State
Government under Section 5[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act, the District
Commissioner as the Chairman, District Delimitation Commission had issued the
final notifications under Section 6[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act. He has placed
a Notification dated 11.11.2024 issued by the District Commissioner & Chairman,
District Delimitation Commission, Karimganj as a testimony. He has indicated
that the process was indicated in Clause 9 of the SOP.
35.10. On the aspect of placing emphasis on Clause 4[x] of the SOP by the petitioners,
Mr. Saikia has contended that the clause was placed for working out the
delimitation process in the event the State Government would have decided to
follow the alternative option for establishment of Gaon Panchayats, available to
it under Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended. It was in such a
situation, the categorization of the districts based on the factors mentioned
therein would have been dependent and it was keeping such scenario, Clause
4[x] was incorporated in the SOP. Having not required to follow the procedure
under Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act and the non-enforceability of the
SOP being a set of guidelines, it is not open for the petitioners to contend that
Clause 4[x] of the SOP is mandatory in nature and the same was required to be
adhered to in all situations.
35.11. Learned Advocate General has further submitted that a citizen as a voter-elector
has a right to elect and can also have the right to get elected in elections to
Panchayati Raj Institutions. By the concluded delimitation exercise, none of those
rights of the petitioners have been violated. The petitioners have additionally
highlighted about non-contiguity among constituencies, distance between the
households and the polling stations, long distance from the head offices of the
Gaon Panchayats, difficulties with regard to accessibility, mode of transportation,
etc. He has submitted that it has been stated in the affidavits that all those
factors were taken into consideration. He has fairly submitted that some of such
factors might cause hardships and inconveniences but such factors alone are not
Page 84 of 195
sustainable in law to derail and upset a meticulously undertaken exercise of
delimitation across the State involving huge manpower and resources.
35.12. It is further submitted that the challenge made in relation to Section 5[1] of the
Assam Panchayat Act is to be examined by looking at its contents. The word,
‘may’ appearing in the main enacting provision of sub-section [1] of Section 5
itself is a pointer to a situation that it is for the State Government to decide
whether to proceed or not to proceed in the manner provided therein. For
proceeding in the manner provided under sub-section [1] of Section 5, it is
imperative to issue a notification. From a reading of the main enacting provision
and the proviso together, according to him, it would emerge that only in the
event the State Government would decide to follow the provisions of the main
enacting provision of sub-section [1] of Section 5, the categorization of districts,
as per population density, etc., as mentioned in the proviso, would have been
necessary. He has, thus, contended that the word, ‘may’ appearing in the main
part of sub-section [1] of Section 5 controls the word, ‘shall’ appearing in the
proviso thereto.
35.13. On the proposition as to how the scope of a proviso in a statutory provision is to
be examined and the words, ‘shall’ and ‘may’ are to be interpreted, he has
referred to the decisions of the Privy Council in Montreal Street Railway
Company vs. Normandin, AIR 1917 PC 142; & Thompson vs. Dibdin and
others, 1912 AC 533; and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Dwarka Prasad
vs. Dwarka Das Saraf, [1976] 1 SCC 128; Adani Gas Limited vs. Union of India
and others, [2022] 5 SCC 210; & Bhikraj Jaipuria vs. Union of India, AIR
1962 SC 113.
35.14. It is a contention of the learned Advocate General that though the petitioners
sides’ have advanced submissions regarding breach of the constitutional
principle, enshrined in Part-IX, more particularly, Article 243C but for setting up
such a plea, the petitioners have not laid any satisfactory factual foundation in
Page 85 of 195
the pleadings of their writ petitions. To set up such a plea, the petitioners ought
to have referred to the identified data. Had the necessary pleadings, setting up
such a plea, been laid in the writ petitions, the State respondents would have
the occasion to traverse the same also with identified data to substantiate that
the principle embedded in Article 243C has been followed, as far as practicable.
On the said issue, reliance has been placed in the decision in State of Uttar
Pradesh and other vs. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti and other, 1995 Supp
[2] SCC 305.
35.15. It is submitted on behalf of the State is that there was no notification issued
under Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, whereas the
petitioners’ challenge is based on the premise that a notification under Section
5[1] is the only way, there was no occasion for the State to mention in detail in
the pleadings about compliance of the other statutory provisions and procedural
requirements. Had those been pleaded it could have been traversed and rebutted
appropriately.
35.16. Mr. Saikia has reiterated his submission on the point of maintainability in so far
as the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 48/2025 is concerned. He has submitted that
the writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner, namely, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar
Suraksha Mancho’. It has been proclaimed that the petitioner is non-Government
organization [NGO], formed by inhabitants of areas within no. 123 Karimganj
North LAC. He has submitted that from the pleadings itself, it would emerge that
the NGO was formed on 14.12.2024, that is, much after publication of the
Notification dated 15.10.2024. There is no statement that the NGO is a registered
entity. It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner is an unregistered entity. By
referring to the time-lines for completing the delimitation process made public
by the Notification dated 03.08.2024 and the Addendum Notification dated
05.09.2024, it has been contended that the delimitation exercise initiated with
the Notification dated 03.08.2024 was already over when the unregistered NGO
was purportedly formed on 14.12.2024. In the writ petition, it is averred, in
Page 86 of 195
paragraph 6 as a matter of record, that a representation against the delimitation
process was submitted on behalf of the NGO whereas, according to the
statement made in the writ petition, the NGO was formed on 14.12.2024. He
has, thus, contended the writ petition has been preferred pleading wrong facts
and it deserves to be dismissed solely on that count. He has further submitted
that it is settled proposition that a writ petition by an unregistered
association/NGO is not maintainable. Further, an NGO do not enjoy any voting
right and as such, it cannot be pleaded that any of its rights has been violated
by the delimitation exercise. Mr. Saikia has submitted that there is same
objection on the point of maintainability in respect of the writ petitions – W.P.[C]
no. 5771/2024 and W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024 – as these writ petitions are also filed
by unregistered entities. The petitioner no. 1 in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no.
102/2025 is also an unregistered association. To buttress the point, reliance has
been placed in a Division Bench decision of this Court in Rangapara
Development Circle vs. State of Assam and others, 2007 [3] GLR 805 and a
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mani Subrat Jain, etc. vs. State of
Haryana and others, [1977] 2 SCR 361. Mr. Konwar, learned Additional
Advocate General has placed few other decisions, which would be mentioned in
the later part of this order, to supplement the issue of non-maintainability of a
writ petition instituted by unregistered association.
VII. Submissions on behalf of the respondent ASEC :-
36. Mr. R. Dubey, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Election Commission
[ASEC] appearing for the respondent ASEC authorities has referred to Clause [1]
of Article 243K of the Constitution and Section 114 of the Assam Panchayat Act
to submit that the ASEC is vested with the responsibility of superintendence,
direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of,
all elections to the Panchayats in Assam. It is submitted by him that the ASEC is
not directly associated with the delimitation of the Panchayats at any of the three
levels.
Page 87 of 195
36.1. By referring to and placing a nos. of notifications issued by the ASEC on and from
30.09.2023, Mr. Dubey has submitted that the State Election Commission had
initiated the process of publication of electoral rolls pertaining to the Panchayats
on and from 29.09.2023 and for preparation of online photo electoral rolls, it had
adopted Online Electoral Roll Management System [OERMS]. On 14.08.2024, it
was notified for updation of the Panchayat Electoral Rolls with new eligible voters
as per the State Assembly Elecotoral Rolls published on 19.04.2024. It was
further notified that the Panchayat Elecotoral Rolls would be reorganized and
prepared in the second phase in accordance with the fresh delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads by the Government of
Assam. The time lines for various stages of preparation and publication of the
electoral rolls were also fixed.
36.2. On 13.12.2024, a Press Release was published informing that the Draft Electoral
Rolls for the Panchayat elections were published to receive claims and objections
to the entries from 14.12.2024 to 21.12.2024. After taking into account the
claims and objections, the State Election Commission published another Press
Release on 28.12.2024. By the Press Release, it was notified that the Final
Electoral Rolls for the ensuing Panchayat Election in 2025 had been published
after taking into account effects of fresh delimitation of Gaon Panchayat,
Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad constituencies by the Government of
Assam in 2024 for twenty-seven districts and the break-up was inter-alia given
in the following manner :-
Total Total no. of Zilla Total no. of Total no. of Gaon Total no. of
Districts Parishad Anchalik Panchayats Wards
Constituencies Panchayats
27 397 181 2192 21920
Page 88 of 195VIII. Reply submissions on behalf of the petitioners :-
37. Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel in his reply submissions, has reiterated
that there cannot be any resort to the provisions of Section 5[2] of the Assam
Panchayat Act by-passing the provisions of Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat
Act. He has contended that by the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, new Gaon
Panchayats came into being. For establishment of new Gaon Panchayats, the
only provision which can be resorted to is Section 5[1]. With clear admission
from the State respondents that recourse to Section 5[1] was not taken for
issuance of the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, the delimitation process has
clearly violated Clause 4[x] of the SOP and consequently, the process has
suffered from violation of not only the statutory provisions but also of the
constitutional provisions.
38. Mr. Talukdar, leaned counsel has submitted that by Section 5[2] of the Assam
Panchayat Act, the State Government has been empowered only to include within
or exclude from any village, any local area or otherwise, from the limit of any
village. Section 5[2] can be resorted only in situations of exigency, that too, only
after formation of Gaon Panchayats under amended Section 5[1]. It is his
contention that the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, could not have been issued
solely under Section 5[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act for carrying out any
delimitation process at the Gaon Panchayat level.
38.1. The issue of maintainability of the writ petitions, W.P.[C] no. 48/2025, W.P.[C]
no. 5771/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024, and the locus standi of the petitioners,
raised by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the State respondents has
been contested by Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for those petitioners. Mr.
Talukdar has submitted that the issue of maintainability was raised earlier on
behalf of the State respondents during the course of hearing taken place on the
prayer for interim relief, which culminated into an Order dated 10.01.2025. When
the issue of maintainability was raised, it was responded to by submitting that
Page 89 of 195the locus standi of the petitioner, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ cannot
be questioned at that stage. Notwithstanding that it is a ‘morcha’ which has filed
the writ petition, it is comprised of persons who are ultimately affected by the
process of delimitation undertaken by the State. He has submitted that as the
issue of maintainability was raised and heard during a previous stage culminating
into the Order dated 10.01.2025, the issue cannot be re-opened and re-agitated
at a subsequent stage. He has cited the decision titled S.P Gupta vs. Union of
India and another, 1981 [Supp] SCC 87; and a decision of the Allahabad High
Court in Umesh Chand Vinod Kumar and others vs. Krishi Utpadan Mandi
Samiti, Bharthana, AIR 1984 Allahabad 46, to lend weight to his submissions
that an unregistered association/NGO can havelocus to file the writ petition. He
has also referred to a decision titled Swaraj Abhiyan and another vs. Union of
India and others, reported in [2018] 4 SCC 300.
39. An Order dated 24.07.2023 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ
Petition [Civil] no. 51 of 2023 [Hirendranath Gohain vs. Union of India and
others] has been placed before the Court to submit that the delimitation of
Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies undertaken by the Election
Commission of India [ECI] has been put to challenge and is pending as on date.
Discussion, Analysis & Reasons for Decision :-
40. I have duly considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel from
both the sides. I have also gone through the materials brought on record by the
parties through their pleadings, for the purpose of deciding the lis, as mentioned
in paragraph 14 above. I have considered the legal provisions, the materials
referred to and the decisions placed by the learned counsel for the parties in
support of their respective submissions.
Page 90 of 195
IX. The districts wherefrom the challenges have emanated :-
41. In this batch of thirty-two nos. of writ petitions, four writ petitions are from
Cachar district, five writ petitions are from Hailakandi district, ten writ petitions
are from Karimganj/Sribhumi district, five writ petitions are from Nagaon district,
three writ petitions are from Lakhimpur district, two writ petitions are from
Darrang district, two writ petitionsare from Morigaon district and one writ petition
is from Dhubri district. Thus, the writ petitions are preferred from eight nos. of
districts out of the twenty-seven nos. of districts, where Panchayati Raj system
is prevalent in the State of Assam.
X. The Notification dated 03.08.2024/the Standard Operating Procedure :-
42. In the writ petitions, the writ petitioners have highlighted the following actions
taken during the delimitation process :-
[i] In many Legislative Assembly Constituencies [LACs], there have been
changes in the total number of Gaon Panchayats. In case of few LACs, there
have been reduction in number of Gaon Panchayats within it after LAC
delimitation process whereas in case of few others, there have been increase in
number of Gaon Panchayats after LAC delimitation.
[ii] There have been changes in the number of villages in a number of Gaon
Panchayats. In case of few Gaon Panchayats, villages have been added and in
case of few other Gaon Panchayats, villages have been taken out of them.
[iii] The names of number of Gaon Panchayats have been changed. In some
cases, two Gaon Panchayats have been merged to form a new Gaon Panchayat.
[iv] There are inconsistent assertions as regards categorization of districts on
the basis of population density. The petitioners have alleged that Gaon
Panchayats have not been formed on the basis of population density of the
concerned districts.
Page 91 of 195
[v] Gaon Panchayat constituencies have not been delimited as per population
density.
The petitioners have alleged a number of other actions, which would be adverted
to at appropriate places subsequently in this order. The petitioners have termed
all such kind of actions as arbitrary actions and the actions are against the
mandate of law. It would be expedient to deal with the issues broadly instead of
dealing them individually on the basis of the claims made in each of the writ
petitions, along with the other legal issues raised on the basis of constitutional
and statutory provisions.
43. The cornerstone of the challenge for the writ petitioners is the Notification
bearing no. E-449396/18 dated 03.08.2024, issued by the Panchayat & Rural
Development Department, Government of Assam and published in the Assam
Gazette in Issue no. 457 dated 21.08.2024. By the Notification dated 03.08.2024,
the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] to be followed for delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in Assam has been laid
down. It may be stated, at the cost of repetition, that a part of the delimitation
process, which commenced after issuance of the Notification dated 03.08.2024
with its publication in the Assam Gazette on 21.08.2024, was furthered to
another stage with the publication of the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, by the
Government of Assam in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department. At
this juncture, the discussion is made confined to the Notification dated
03.08.2024, leaving the discussion on the challenge made to the Notifications,
dated 15.10.2024, to a later stage.
44. For ready reference, the contents of the Notification dated 03.08.2024, published
in the Assam Gazette on 21.08.2024, are reproduced hereinbelow :-
Page 92 of 195
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTNOTIFICATION
The 3rd August, 2024
No. E-449396/18.- In pursuance to the Cabinet decision held on 19-06-2024
the Governor of Assam is pleased to notify the Standard Operating Procedure
to be followed for Delimitation of Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat & Zilla
Parishad in Assam :
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE [SOP] FOR DELIMITATION OF
GAON PANCHAYAT, ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT & ZILLA PARISHAD.
1. Introduction : This SOP delineates the meticulous steps and strategies
to be employed for the seamless execution of the procedure for Delimitation
of Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat & Zilla Parishad in Assam.
2. Objective : The primary objective of this SOP is to ensure a systematic
and efficient process of delimitation, to be followed by the District Delimitation
Commission.
3. Definition of District Delimitation Commission : The District Delimitation
Commission constituted as per Section 3 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994
[as amended] consists of following members :
District Commissioner : Chairman
CEO, Zilla Parishad : Member Secretary
Page 93 of 195
Election Officer[s] : Member
4. Delimitation of Gaon Panchayat :
Criteria for the delimitation :
i. The ECI notification vide no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated 11th August
2023 is to be diligently referred to, for source of Gaon Panchayats and
villages falling in an LAC.
ii. The number of Gaon Panchayats in the district shall remain same as that
of the current number of Gaon Panchayat in the district after LAC
delimitation.
iii. One Gaon Panchayat shall belong to only one LAC i.e. no Gaon
Panchayat jurisdiction shall be shared with more than one LAC.
iv. If a Gaon Panchayat after LAC delimitation is not shared among more
than one LAC, then preferably the Gaon Panchayat boundary will be
retained.
v. If a Gaon Panchayat after LAC delimitation is shared among more than
one LAC then the villages under respective LACs either may be grouped
to form a new GP or may accommodate in the nearby existing GP
provided Criteria 4 [ii] is not violated.
vi. If a new Gaon Panchayat is to be formed without violating the Criteria 4
[ii], the population, natural boundary and category of the District shall be
considered as per Section 5 [1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [as
amended].
vii. A census village shall not be bifurcated into two or more Gaon
Panchayats.
viii. As per LAC delimitation if a Gaon Panchayat is divided between two
districts, then that Gaon Panchayat will be considered in the district
having the Gaon Panchayat Headquarter.
Page 94 of 195
ix. After delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats, the delimitation of Gaon
Panchayat Constituencies [i.e. 10 numbers of wards] within the Gaon
Panchayats shall be done as per Section 6 [2] of the Assam Panchayat
Act, 1994.
x. The categorization of districts based on population, density and any other
relevant factors will be followed as per Section 5[1] of Assam Panchayat
Act, 1994 [as amended].
5. Delimitation of Anchalik Panchayat
i. As the Anchalik Panchayats are co-terminus with the Development
Blocks [as per Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994] so
reorganization of blocks will automatically delimit the Anchalik
Panchayat.
ii. One Gaon Panchayat under the jurisdiction of the Anchalik Panchayat
area shall form a constituency for electing one member directly to the
Anchalik Panchayat as per Section 32 of the Assam Panchayat Act,
1994.
6. Delimitation of Zilla Parishad
In view of Section 65[1][i] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994,
i. A territorial constituency of Zilla Parishad [ZPC] will belong to only one
LAC.
ii. In case of 100% rural population in an LAC, the LAC shall have four
territorial constituencies [ZPC] at a rate of one member for a population
of not less than thirty thousand.
iii. And in case of an LAC having rural and urban population, each ZPC will
constitute with not less than thirty thousand rural population and that LAC
may have less than four territorial constituencies and if the rural
Page 95 of 195
population of this Legislative Assembly Constituency is less than thirty
thousand, this may form only one territorial constituency.
7. A LAC level Task Force is proposed for the Delimitation of Gaon
Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat & Zilla Parishad and Block Reorganization.
The LAC wise Task force will execute the delimitation and reorganisation
process at the LAC level. The District Delimitation Commission will form the
LAC level Task Force from the respective LAC of the district. The composition
of the LAC level Task Force is as follows :
[a] Team Leader : One Circle Officer whose maximum area falls in
the LAC
[b] Team Member-1 : One BDO, whose maximum area falls in the LAC
[c] Team Member-2 : One Official / Administrative Assistant with good
knowledge of Computer and MS-Excel
[d] Team Member-3 : One Official to be nominated by the Team Leader,
who has good understanding of GP / Block
Boundaries.
The LAC Task Force will report to the CEO, Zilla Parishad who is the Member
Secretary of the District Delimitation Commission.
Role of the Task Force :
The LAC Task Force will report to the CEO, Zilla Parishad [Member
Secretary of the District Delimitation Commission].
The Task Force will collect the LAC wise list of Villages and respective
Gaon Panchayat’s name from the District Delimitation Commission as
notified by the ECI in LAC Delimitation.
Page 96 of 195
Once the LAC wise Village list is collected, the Gaon Panchayat is to be
assigned against each village.
8. Public Consultation :
a) Publication of the draft delimitation notification :
o Publish the draft delimitation notification to invite objections and
suggestions from the public and civil society latest by 6th September,
2024.
b) Public Hearings :
o Organize public hearings at district and block levels to gather feedback
and dispose objections and suggestions latest by 7th September, 2024
to 16th September, 2024.
9. Finalization of the Delimitation and notification :
o The final delimitation process of, Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat
and Zilla Parishad and notification of the same by District Delimitation
Commission is to be completed by 17th September 2024.
10. District wise No. of Zilla Parishad Constituencies :
Sl. No. DISTRICT NO. OF ZPC
1 Bajali 6
2 Barpeta 23
3 Biswanath 13
4 Bongaigaon 12
5 Chachar 27
6 Charaideo 7
Page 97 of 195
7 Darrang 14
8 Dhemaji 7
9 Dhubri 24
10 Dibrugarh 23
11 Goalpara 16
12 Golaghat 17
13 Hailakandi 11
14. Hojai 12
15 Jorhat 19
16 Kamrup 26
17 Kamrup [M] 6
18 Karimganj 20
19 Lakhimpur 17
20 Majuli 4
21 Morigaon 13
22 Nagaon 29
23 Nalbari 13
24 Sivasagar 17
25 Sonitpur 19
26 South Salmara 5
27 Tinsukia 20
TOTAL 420
45. After publication of the afore-quoted Notification dated 03.08.2024, an
Addendum Notification bearing no. E- 449396/32 dated 05.09.2024 was issued
and the Addendum Notification was published in the Assam Gazette, in Issue no.
457 dated 09.10.2024. The contents of the Addendum Notification are as under
:-
Page 98 of 195
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTADDENDUM
The 5th September, 2024No.E-449396/32.In continuation of this Department’s earlier Notification No.
E-449396/18 dated 3th August, 2024, regarding Standard Operating
Procedure [SOP] for Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zila
Parishads, the Governor of Assam is pleased to incorporate the following
points :
The date for publication of Draft Delimitation Notification by the District
Delimitation Commission is hereby extended by 10 days up to 17th September,
2024.
The Final Notification will be issued on 27th September, 2024.
Following guidelines are notified in addition to guideline issued earlier
regarding Public Hearings after the publication of Draft Delimitation
Notification :
i. Adequate publicity of the Draft Notification is to be given through proper
channels [e.g., through GP Functionaries / Gaon Pradhans / Notice Boards /
Press Briefing / etc.] by the District Delimitation Commission.
ii. After publication of the Draft [GP Ward / AP / ZP] in the prescribed format,
Public Hearings will be conducted at District Level which will be scheduled
LAC Wise.
iii. The public would include individuals, civil society organizations and
recognized Political Parties.
Page 99 of 195
iv. Those from public who want to give representation / representations /
suggestions / objections in the hearing are required to submit their
representation / representations / suggestions / objections to the concerned
CEO, Zilla Parishad / Member Secretary, District Delimitation Commission
from 18th September to 20th September, 2024.
v. Just after the publication of the Draft Delimitation Notification, the District
Delimitation Commission will organize one meeting with all the recognized
Political Parties by 19th September, 2024.
vi. The District Delimitation Commission will scrutinize and sort out the
representations received, clubbing the common ones together, by 22nd
September, 2024 and hear the representations / suggestions / objections from
the Public [Individuals and Civil Society Organizations] scheduling the
hearings LAC Wise from 23rd September till 25th September 2024.
vii. Each LAC wise hearing may be chaired by different Additional District
Commissioners along with LAC wise task forces as nominated by the District
Delimitation Commission.
viii.LAC wise venues / rooms in DC Offices may be notified by the District
Delimitation Commission for the hearing purposes.
ix. Based on hearing of the representations / suggestions / objections in
person and as per Constitutional as well as legal provisions under the Assam
Panchayat Act, 1994 [as amended], District Delimitation Commission will
notify the Gaon Panchayats with Ward details, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla
Parishads by 27th September 2024.
x. Timeline for Hearing shall be as follows :
Date Particulars
18th to 20th September, Submission of representation /
2024 representations by individuals / civil society
organizations.
Page 100 of 195
By19th September, 2024 Meeting with all the recognized Political
Parties.
By 22nd September, 2024 Sorting and scrutinizing of the
representation/ representations /
suggestions / objections and schedule
hearing dates and issue notifications for the
same.
23rd to 25th September, Conduct hearings at district level LAC wise
2024 for individuals / organizations keeping
separate dates for individuals and
organizations respectively.
By 26th September, 2024 Work on modifications, if any
27th September, 2024 Final Notification
XI. The Constitution of India and Delimitation of Constituencies:-
46. In the Notification dated 03.08.2024, extracted above, it has been made specific
that the Notification no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023of the
Election Commission of India [ECI] would be made the basis for the delimitation
exercise to be commenced with the issuance of the Notification dated 03.08.2024
and the exercise would be done by following the Standard Operating Procedure
[SOP] formulated therein. The State Government in Clause 4[i] of the Notification
dated 03.08.2024 had notified that the Notification dated 11.08.2023 of the ECI
would be diligently referred to for source of Gaon Panchayats and villages falling
in a Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC]. Thus, the Notification dated
11.08.2023 was the basis and source of Gaon Panchayats and villages for the
exercise sought to be initiated in terms of the clauses following Clause 4[i]. It
has, therefore, become necessary to make a study of the events leading to the
issuance and also to find out the relevance, importance and force of the ECI’s
Page 101 of 195Notification dated 11.08.2023, before going into the challenges made by the
petitioners.
47. Article 82 of the Constitution of India has provided for allocation of seats in the
House of the People [Lok Sabha] and the division of each State into territorial
constituencies by such authority and in such manner as the Parliament, by law,
determine. In similar manner, Article 170 of the Constitution has provided for
allocation of seats in the Legislative Assembly of each State and the division of
each State into territorial constituencies by such authority and in such manner
as the Parliament, by law, determine.
48. Article 81 of the Constitution has prescribed for composition of the House of the
People. As per Clause [1], the House of the People, subject to the provisions of
Article 331, shall consist of [a] not more than five hundred and thirty members
chosen by direct election from territorial constituencies in the States; and [b] not
more than twenty members to represent the Union Territory; chosen in such
manner as the Parliament may by law provide. As per Clause [2] of Article 81,
for the purposes of sub-clause [a] of Clause [1], [a] there shall be allotted to
each State a number of seats in the House of the People in such manner that
the ratio between the number and the population of the State is, so far as
practicable, the same for all States; and [b] each State shall be divided into
territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio between the population
of each constituency and number of seats allotted to it is, so far as practicable,
the same throughout the State. In Clause [3], the meaning of the expression,
‘population’ has been provided and ‘population’ means the population as
ascertained at the last preceding Census of which the relevant figures have been
published.
49. As per the proviso to Clause [3] of Article 81, [i] for the purposes of sub-clause
[a] of Clause [2] and the proviso to that clause, the last preceding Census would
be the 1971 Census; and [ii] for the purposes of sub-clause [b] of Clause [2],
Page 102 of 195the last preceding Census would be the 2001 Census; and the said position would
continue until the relevant figures for the first Census taken after the year 2026
have been published. Article 82 has prescribed for re-adjustment after each
Census. According to Article 82, upon completion of each Census, the allocation
of seats in the House of the People to the States and the division of each State
into territorial constituencies shall be re-adjusted by such authority and in such
manner as Parliament may by law determine.
50. Article 170 of the Constitution has provided for composition of the Legislative
Assemblies. As per Clause [1], the Legislative Assembly of each State, subject to
the provisions of Article 333, shall consist of not more than five hundred, and
not less than sixty, members chosen by direct election from territorial
constituencies in the State. Clause [2] has stipulated that, for the purpose of
Clause [1], each State shall be divided into territorial constituencies in such
manner that the ratio between the population of each constituency and the
number of seats allotted to it shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout
the State. As per the Explanation part of this clause, the expression ‘population’
means the population as ascertained at the last preceding Census of which the
relevant figures have been published. As per the proviso to the Explanation part,
the reference in the Explanation part to the last preceding Census of which the
relevant figures have been published shall, until the relevant figures for the first
Census taken after the year 2026 have been published, be construed as a
reference to the 2001 Census.
51. Clause [3] of Article 170 is substantially pari materia to Article 82. As per Clause
[3] of Article 170, upon the completion of each Census, the total number of seats
in the Legislative Assembly of each State and the division of each State into
territorial constituencies shall be re-adjusted by such authority and in such
manner as Parliament may by law determine. The third proviso to Clause [3] has
provided that until the relevant figures for the first Census taken after the year
2026 have been published, it shall not be necessary to re-adjust [i] the total
Page 103 of 195number of seats in the Legislative Assembly or each State as re-adjusted on the
basis of the 1971 Census; and [ii] the division of such State into territorial
constituencies as may be re-adjusted on the basis of the 2001 Census, under
Clause [iii].
52. Under the provisions of Article 82 and Article 170[3] of the Constitution, as
amended by the Constitution [Eighty-Fourth Amendment] Act, 2001, the
Parliament has enacted the Delimitation Act, 2002. The Delimitation Act, 2002
[Act no. 33 of 2002] is an Act to provide for the re-adjustment of the allocation
of seats in the House of the People to the States, the total number of seats in
the Legislative Assembly of each State, the division of each State and each Union
Territory having a Legislative Assembly into territorial constituencies for elections
to the House of the People and Legislative Assemblies of the States and Union
Territories and for matters connected therewith.
53. With the enactment of the Delimitation Act, 2002, a Delimitation Commission
was set up to re-adjust the division of each State and Union Territory into
territorial constituencies for the purpose of elections to the House of the People
and to the State Legislative Assemblies on the basis of Census figures as
ascertained at the Census taken in the year, 2001 and the Delimitation
Commission could complete the delimitation process in twenty-five States / Union
Territories. But, delimitation exercise in respect of Assam was suspended and
kept on hold due to various reasons like stay order, apprehension to cause
alienation, postponement till updation of the National Register of Citizens [NRC],
etc. Section 10A of the Delimitation Act, inserted in the Delimitation Act, 2002
w.e.f. 14.01.2008, has provided for deferment of delimitation in certain cases if
the President is satisfied that a situation has arisen whereby the unity and
integrity of India is threatened or there is a serious threat to the peace and public
order. In case of such a situation, the President can, by Order, defer the
delimitation exercise in a State. In exercise of such power, the President, by a
deferment Order issued vide Notification no. S.O.283[E] dated 08.02.2008,
Page 104 of 195deferred the delimitation exercise in the State of Assam with immediate effect
and until further orders.
54. Close on the heels of insertion of Section 10A in the Delimitation Act, 2002 and
deferment of the delimitation exercise in the State of Assam by the deferment
Order dated 08.02.2008, a new section, Section 8A has been inserted in the
Representation of the People Act, 1950 with the nominal heading, ‘Delimitation
of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the States of Arunachal
Pradesh, Assam, Manipur or Nagaland’.
55. For ready reference, Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 is
quoted, in its entirety, hereinbelow :-
8A. Delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the
States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur or Nagaland.
[1] If the President is satisfied that the situation and the conditions prevailing
in the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur or Nagaland are
conducive for the conduct of delimitation exercise, he may, by Order, rescind
the deferment Order issued under the provisions of Section 10A of the
Delimitation Act, 2002 [33 of 2002] in relation to that State, and provide for
the conduct of delimitation exercise in the State by the Election Commission.
[2] As soon as may be after the deferment Order in respect of a State is
rescinded under sub-section [1], the Election Commission may, by order,
determine-
[a] the parliamentary constituencies into which such State to which more
than one seat is allotted in the First Schedule shall be divided;
[b] the extent of each constituency; and
Page 105 of 195[c] the number of seats, if any, reserved for the Scheduled Castes or the
Scheduled Tribes.
[3] As soon as may be after the deferment order in respect of a State is
rescinded under sub-section [1], the Election Commission may, by order,
determine-
[a] the assembly constituencies into which such State shall be divided for
the purpose of elections to the Legislative Assembly of that State;
[b] the extent of each constituency; and
[c] the number of seats, if any, reserved for the Scheduled Castes or the
Scheduled Tribes.
[4] Subject to the provisions of sub-section [1], the Election Commission
shall, having regard to the provisions of the Constitution and the principles
specified in clauses [c] and [d] of sub-section [1] of Section 9 of the
Delimitation Act, 2002 [33 of 2002] determine the parliamentary and assembly
constituencies in the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and
Nagaland in which seats shall be reserved, if any, for the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes.
[5] The Election Commission shall,-
[a] publish its proposals under sub-sections [2], [3] and [4] with respect to
any State in the Official Gazette and also in such other manner as it thinks fit;
[b] specify a date on or after which the proposals will be further considered
by it;
[c] consider all objections and suggestions which may have been received
by it before the date so specified;
[d] hold, for the purpose of such consideration, if it thinks fit so to do, one or
more public sittings at such place or places in such State as it thinks fit;
Page 106 of 195
[e] after considering all objections and suggestions which may have been
received by it before the date so specified, determine, by order, the
delimitation of parliamentary and assembly constituencies in the State and
also the constituency or constituencies in which seats shall be reserved, if
any, for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and cause such
order to be published in the Official Gazette; and, upon such publication, the
order shall have the force of law and shall not be called in question in any
court and the Delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies
Order, 2008 shall be deemed to have been amended accordingly.
[6] Every order made under sub-sections [1] and [2] and clause [e] of sub-
section [5] shall be laid before each House of Parliament.
[7] Every order made under sub-sections [1] and [3] and clause [e] of sub-
section [5] shall, as soon as may be after it is published under that sub-
section, be laid before the Legislative Assembly of the State concerned.
56. It is inter-alia mentioned in Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act,
1950 that if the President is satisfied that the situations and the conditions
prevailing in the State of Assam are conducive for the conduct of delimitation
exercise, the President may, by Order, rescind the deferment Order issued under
Section 10A of the Delimitation Act, 2002 and provide for conduct of delimitation
exercise by the ECI. As soon as may be after the deferment Order is rescinded,
the ECI may, inter-alia, by Order, determine: [i] the Parliamentary
Constituencies and Assembly Constituencies into which such State [Assam] shall
be divided for the purpose of election to the House of the People and to the
Legislative Assembly; and [ii] the extent of each Constituency. The manner in
which the ECI shall proceed with the exercise is also delineated in Section 8A of
the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Page 107 of 195
57. It was on 28.02.2020, the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India being
satisfied that the circumstances which led to the deferring of the delimitation
exercise in the State of Assam had ceased to exist, rescinded the deferment
Order issued on 08.02.2008 by an Order issued vide Notification no. S.O.903[E]
so as to re-adjust the division of the State of Assam into territorial constituencies
for the purpose of elections to the House of the People and to the State
Legislative Assembly in accordance with the provisions of the Delimitation Act,
2002. Subsequently, the ECI was requested by the Ministry of Law and Justice,
Government of India vide a Letter dated 15.11.2022 to conduct the delimitation
of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the State of Assam as per
Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Accordingly, the ECI
initiated a delimitation exercise of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in
the State of Assam as per Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act,
1950.
58. Taking note of the mandate contained in Article 82 and Article 170 of the
Constitution of India that the number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of each
State and the allocation of seats in the House of the People to the States shall
not be altered until the relevant figures for the first Census taken after the year
2026 have been published, the ECI decided to take the figures of the 2001
Census for the purpose. The ECI further decided the number of seats in the
Legislative Assembly and the House of the People in the State of Assam would
be retained at one hundred twenty six [126] and fourteen [14] respectively.
Following the Guidelines and Methodology formulated in conformity with the
constitutional and legal provisions; and the procedure prescribed in Section 8A
of the Representation of the People Act, 1950; the exercise for delimitation of
Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies for the State of Assam, undertaken
by the ECI, stood completed with the publication of a final Order on 11.08.2023.
59. The completion of the delimitation exercise of Parliamentary and Assembly
Constituencies for the State of Assam had resulted in publication of the
Page 108 of 195
Notification bearing no. 282/AS/2023[DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023 by the ECI
determining the manner in which fourteen [14] Parliamentary Constituencies and
one hundred twenty six [126] Legislative Assembly Constituencies of Assam shall
be divided for the pupose of elections and the extents of these constituencies.
The said Notification was published in the Gazette of India in Issue no. 32 dated
11.08.2023 and also in the Assam Gazette.
60. The relevant parts of the ECI’s Order notified vide Notification no.
282/AS/2023[DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023 read as under :-
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-110001
282/AS/2023[DEL]/Vol.V Dated : 11th August, 2023
20 Sravana, 1945 [Saka]NOTIFICATION
In pursuance of Section 8A[5][e] of the Representation of the People Act,
1950 read with Presidential Orders issued vide S.O. 903[E] dated 28th
February, 2020, the following Order made by the Election Commission under
Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 read with
Presidential Orders issued vide S.O. 903[E] dated 28th February, 2020, in
respect of the delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in
the State of Assam is hereby published.
* * * * * *
NOW THEREFORE, in pursuance of Section 8A[5] of the Representation of
the People Act, 1950 read with Presidential Orders issued vide S.O.No.
903[E] dated 28th February, 2020 to amend Schedule – I & II and Schedule
– V [with regard to the State of Assam] to the Delimitation of Parliamentary
Page 109 of 195and Assembly Constituencies Order, 2008, the Election Commission hereby
determines as follows :
1. One Hundred and Twenty Six Assembly Constituencies into
which the State of Assam shall be divided for the purpose of
elections to the Legislative Assembly of the State and the extent
of each such Constituency shall be as shown in Table – A.
2. The territorial Parliamentary Constituencies into which the
State of Assam shall be divided for the purpose of elections to the
House of the People and the extent of each such Constituency
shall be as shown in Table – B.
3. Where the name of a Constituency as shown in Table – A or
Table – B is distinguished by the brackets and letters ‘[SC]’ the seat
in that Constituency is reserved for the Scheduled Castes.
4. Where the name of a Constituency as shown in Table – A or
Table – B is distinguished by the brackets and letters ‘[ST]’ the seat
in that Constituency is reserved for the Scheduled Tribes.
61. It is apt, at this point, to refer to the following observations made by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in the Constitution Bench Judgment in Meghraj Kothari
vs. Delimitation Commission and others, AIR 1967 SC 669 , :-
20. In our view, therefore, the objection to the delimitation of constituencies
could only be entertained by the Commission before the date specified. Once
the orders made by the Commission under Sections 8 and 9 were published
in the Gazette of India and in the Official Gazettes of the States concerned,
these matters could no longer be reagitated in a court of law. There seems to
be very good reason behind such a provision. If the orders made under
Sections 8 and 9 were not to be treated as final, the effect would be that any
voter, if he so wished, could hold up an election indefinitely by questioning the
delimitation of the constituencies from court to court. Section 10[2] of the Act
Page 110 of 195clearly demonstrates the intention of the Legislature that the orders under
Sections 8 and 9 published under Section 10[1] were to be treated as law
which was not to be questioned in any court.
21. It is true that an order under Section 8 or 9 published under Section 10[1]
is not part of an Act of Parliament, but its effect is to be the same.
* * * * * *
32. In this case the powers given by the Delimitation Commission Act and
the work of the Commission would be wholly nugatory unless the Commission
as a result of its deliberations and public sittings were in a position to readjust
the number of seats in the House of the People or the total number of seats
to be assigned to the Legislative Assembly with reservation for the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the delimitation of constituencies. It was
the will of Parliament that the Commission could by order publish its proposals
which were to be given effect to in the subsequent election and as such its
order as published in the notification of the Gazette of India or the Gazette of
the State was to be treated as law on the subject.
62. Section 8A[5][e] of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 has inter-alia
prescribed that if after following the procedure prescribed in the preceding
provisions for delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in a
State, the ECI causes the delimitation Order to be published in the Official
Gazette, then, upon such publication, the Order shall have the force of law and
shall not be called in question in any court. The ECI after carrying out the
delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the State of Assam,
had made the Order bearing no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023 and
published it in the Gazette of India in Issue no. 32 dated 11.08.2023 and also in
the Assam Gazette. Following the observations made in relation to such a
delimitation Order published in the Official Gazette in Meghraj Kothari [supra],
the Order no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023 of the ECI, published
Page 111 of 195
in the Official Gazettes, has to be treated as law on the subject of delimitation
and division of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies in the State of Assam.
The resultant effect of the Order of the ECI would bring on the delimitation of
constituencies of the Panchayats in the State of Assam is an aspect, which would
also require an examination vis-à-vis the challenges made in this batch of writ
petition.
XII. Writ Petition [C] no. 51/2023 [Hirendranath Gohain vs. Union of India and
others] :-
63. From the Order dated 24.07.2023 passed in Hirendranath Gohai [supra], it can
be noticed that in the said writ petition, a challenge has been made before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court to the constitutional validity of Section 8A of the
Representation of the People Act, 1950 apart from a challenge made to the
decision taken on 28.02.2020 to rescind the deferment Order issued vide
Notification dated 08.02.2008.The Hon’ble Court had taken note of the fact that
the decision taken on 28.02.2020 had paved the way for the process to readjust
the division of the State of Assam into territorial constituencies for the purpose
of elections to the House of the People and to the State Legislative Assembly in
accordance with the provisions of the Delimitation Act, 2002. The process of
delimitation which had commenced following the decision dated 28.02.2020, has
also been called in question. The Hon’ble Court in the Order dated 24.07.2023
had inter-alia observed that since the process had commenced following the
Notification dated 28.02.2020 and a draft proposal had been published on
20.06.2023, it would not be appropriate to interdict the process at that stage.
The Hon’ble Court while reserving the constitutional challenge for further
deliberation, did not interdict the ECI from taking further steps.
64. It is submitted at the Bar by the learned counsel for the parties that the
proceedings of Writ Petition [C] no. 51 of 2023 is still pending. It is already found
Page 112 of 195
from the discussion above that the process which commenced after the
Notification dated 28.02.2020, reached to a conclusion vide the Notification
bearing no. 282/AS/2023[DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023 which was published in
Gazette of India in Issue no. 32 dated 11.08.2023. As the ECI’s Order passed in
the said Notification dated 11.08.2023 is an order under Section 8A[5][e] of the
Representation of the People Act, 1950, the position as regards its having the
force of law in the matter of delimitation and division of Parliamentary and
Assembly Constituencies exists as on date.
65. It has been mentioned in the Delimitation Report published by the ECI that it
was decided by the ECI that constituencies shall be delimited having regard to
the administrative units i.e. District/Development Block/Panchayat/Village/
Ward, etc., as in existence as on 01.01.2023. Efforts were made to keep all
constituencies, as far as practicable, as geographically compact areas, and in
delimiting them, the physical features, density of population, existing boundaries
of administrative units, facilities of communication and public convenience were
kept in purview.
XIII. Part-IX : ‘The Panchayats’ of the Constitution of India :-
66. Part-IX of the Constitution of India, titled ‘the Panchayats’, was inserted by the
Constitution [Seventy-Third Amendment] Act, 1992. The purpose of Part-IX is
to implement the Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Article 40 of the
Constitution of India, which directs that the State shall take steps to organize
village panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be
necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government. Part-IX of the
Constitution contains Article 243 and Article 243A to Article 243-O. It is also
relevant to state that Part-IXA, titled ‘the Municipalities’, containing Articles 243P
to 243Z & Articles 243ZA to 243ZG, was inserted in the Constitution by the
Constitution [Seventy-Fourth Amendment] Act, 1992.
Page 113 of 195
67. Article 243 has provided for the definitions of ‘district’, ‘Gram Sabha’,
‘intermediate level’, ‘Panchayat’, ‘Panchayat area’, ‘population’ and ‘village’. The
definitions are as under :-
243. Definitions -In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires, –
[a] ‘District’ means a district in a State;
[b] ‘Gram Sabha’ means a body consisting of persons registered in the
electoral rolls relating to a village comprised within the area of Panchayat
at the village level;
[c] ‘Intermediate level’ means a level between the village and district levels
specified by the Governor of a State by public notification to be the
intermediate level for the purpose of this Part;
[d] ‘Panchayat’ means an institution [by whatever name called] of self-
government constituted under Article 243B, for the rural areas;
[e] ‘Panchayat area’ means the territorial area of a Panchayat;
[f] ‘Population’ means the population as ascertained at the last preceding
census of which the relevant figures have been published;
[g] ‘Village’ means a village specified by the Governor by public notification
to be a village for the purposes of this Part and includes a group of
villages so specified.
68. Article 243B has prescribed for constitution of a three-tier structure of Panchayat
in every State by stating that there shall be constituted in every State Panchayats
at the village, intermediate and district levels in accordance with the provisions
of Part-IX.
69. Article 243C has the nominal heading, ‘Composition of Panchayats’. Clause [1]
of Article 243C states that subject to the provisions of Part-IX, the Legislature of
a State may, by law, make provisions with respect to the composition of
Panchayats : provided that the ratio between the population of the territorial
area of a Panchayat at any level and the number of seats in such Panchayat to
Page 114 of 195
be filled up by election shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the
State. As per Clause [2] of Article 243C, all the seats in a Panchayat shall be filled
by persons chosen by direct election from territorial constituencies in the
Panhayat area and, for this purpose, each Panchayat area shall be divided into
territorial constituencies in such manner that the ratio between the population
of each constituency and the number of seats allotted to it, shall so far as
practicable, be the same throughout the Panchayat area.
70. Article 243D has provided for reservation of seats in Panchayats for the
Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and for Women. Clause [1] of Article
243E contains the mandate for duration of Panchayats by providing that every
Panchayat, unless sooner dissolved under any law for the time being in force,
shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting and no
longer. As per Clause [3] of Article 243E, an election to constitute a Panchayat
shall be completed – [a] before the expiry of its duration specified in Clause [1];
or [b] before the expiration of a period of six months from the date of its
dissolution. It also contains a proviso, which is not necessary for the case in
hand. As per Article 243G, the Legislature of a State is obliged, by law, to endow
the Panchayats with such powers and authority, which are necessary to enable
them to function as institutions of self-government.
71. Article 243K has provided for elections to the Panchayats. As per Clause [1] of
Article 243K, the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of
electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to the Panchayats is vested in
the concerned State Election Commission. As per Clause [4] of Article 243K, the
Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to all matters
relating to, or in connection with, elections to the Panchayats, subject to the
provisions of the Constitution.
72. Article 243O has created a bar for interference by Courts in electoral matters.
Page 115 of 195
73. The constitutional provisions have envisaged the following pyramidical structure
of having a Union Government at the Centre, the State Governments in the
States and Local Self-Governments for the rural areas [Part-IX of the
Constitution] and the urban areas [Part-IXA of the Constitution] :-
Union Government
State Government
Local Self Government
Panchayats Municipalities
Part-IX of the Constitution Part-IXA of the ConstitutionXIV. The Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 :-
74. It is after the Constitution [Seventy-Third Amendment] Act, 1992 by which Part-
IX was brought in the Constitution by way of insertion, the Assam Legislative
Assembly, as empowered, had enacted the Act, ‘the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994‘
to amend and consolidate the laws relating to Panchayats in Assam to be in
conformity with the provisions of Part-IX. The Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [‘The
Assam Panchayat Act‘, for short] extends to the whole of Assam in the rural
areas except the Autonomous Districts under the Sixth Schedule of the
Constitution and excludes any area which has been included in a Municipality or
a Town Committee or a Cantonment constituted under the Assam Municipal Act,
1956 and the Cantonment Act, 1924 respectively or by any other Act. The Assam
Panchayat Act has been amended a number of times since 1994. Lastly, the
Assam Panchayat Act has been amended by the Assam Panchayat [Amendment]
Page 116 of 195
Act, 2023. The Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act, 2023 received the assent of
the Governor on 17.10.2023 and it was published in the Assam Gazette in
Issueno. 490 dated 19.10.2023.
75. The parties are in contestation with regard to interpretation and application of
certain provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act vis-à-vis the constitutional
provisions and the learned counsel for the parties have extensively referred to
them during the course of their submissions as can be found out from the
preceding parts of the discussion, to buttress their respective points of
arguments. The provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, which have
been extensively referred to are Section 3A, Section 5 and Section 6 from
Chapter-IV titled ‘Establishment and Constitution of Gaon Panchayat’. In
addition, few of the provisions from Chapter-V titled ‘Establishment and
Constitution of Anchalik Panchayat’ and Chapter-VI titled ‘Establishment and
Constitution of Zilla Parishad’ have found reference in the Notification dated
03.08.2024. Few other provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act and the Assam
Panchayat [Constitution] Rules, 1995 are also found of import and pertinence
and they would be adverted to at places as and when deemed appropriate.
76. Prior to the Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act, 2023, Section 5 and Section 6
of the Assam Panchayat Act read as under :-
5. Establishment of Gaon Panchayat :
[1] The State Government may by notification, declare any local area
comprising a revenue village or a group of revenue villages or a Forest village
or a Tea-Garden area or hamlets forming part of revenue village or Forest
Village or tea garden area or other such administrative unit or part thereof to
be a Gaon Panchayat with population of its territory not less than six thousand
and not more than ten thousand :
Page 117 of 195
Provided that, where a group of revenue villages or Forest Villages or Tea
Garden areas or hamlets or other such administrative units or part thereof is
declared to be a village, the village shall be known as revenue village, hamlet,
administrative unit or part thereof as the case may be, having the largest
population:
Provided further that the local area of Gaon Panchayats declared under the
provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [Assam Act No. XVIII of 1994]
with a population less in number or more in number than the population
earmarked in this section shall continue to be valid for the purposes of this
Act.
[2] After consultation with the Gaon Panchayat, if it has already been
established, the Government may, by similar notification, at any time –
[a] include within or exclude from any village, any local area or otherwise,
from the limit of any village; or
[b] declare that any local area shall cease to be a village and thereupon the
local area shall be so excluded from the limit of the village so altered.
[3] Every Gaon Panchayat shall be a body corporate by the name of
………… Gaon Panchayat having perpetual succession and a common seal,
with power to acquire and hold property both movable and immovable,
whether within or without the limits of the village over which it has authority
and may be its corporate name sue and be sued.
6. Constitution of Gaon Panchayat :-
[1] The Gaon Panchayat shall consist of –
Page 118 of 195
[a] ten members to be directly elected by the voters of the territorial
constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat area – one from each constituency in
the manner prescribed;
[b] President of the Gaon Panchayat who shall be elected directly by the
voters of the territorial constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat area in the
manner prescribed.
[2] For the convenience of election, the prescribed authority shall in
accordance with such rules as may be prescribed in this behalf by the
Government, divide the area of the Gaon Panchayat into ten territorial
constituencies and allot one seat for each constituency.
[3] When the Gaon Panchayat is constituted under this Section, the Deputy
Commissioner or an officer authorized by the Deputy Commissioner for this
purpose shall call a meeting of the Gaon Panchayat [which shall be
hereinafter called the first meeting of the Gaon Panchayat] for election of a
Vice-President from amongst the members in the manner prescribed.
77. After the amendments are carried out by the Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act,
2023, Section 5 and Section 6 of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, read as
under :-
5. Establishment of Gaon Panchayat :
[1] The State Government may by notification, declare any local area
comprising a revenue village or a group of revenue villages or a Forest village
or a Tea Garden area or hamlets forming part of revenue village or Forest
village or tea garden area or other such administrative unit or part thereof to
be a Gaon Panchayat with population of its territory as per the category within
which the district falls :
Page 119 of 195
Provided that the State Government shall declare 3 [three] categories of
Districts based on population density or any other relevant factor as follows :-
[a] Category ‘A’ district having higher population density shall have Gaon
Panchayats with a population range from 10200 to 13800;
[b] Category ‘B’ district having medium population density shall have Gaon
Panchayats with a population range from 8500 to 11500, and
[c] Category ‘C’ district having lower population density shall have Gaon
Panchayats with a population range from 6000 to 9200.
[2] After consultation with the Gaon Panchayat, if it has already been
established, the Government may, by similar notification, at any time –
[a] include within or exclude from any village, any local area or otherwise,
from the limit of any village; or
[b] declare that any local area shall cease to be a village and thereupon the
local area shall be so excluded from the limit of the village so altered.
[3] Every Gaon Panchayat shall be a body corporate by the name of
………… Gaon Panchayat having perpetual succession and a common seal,
with power to acquire and hold property both movable and immovable,
whether within or without the limits of the village over which it has authority
and may be its corporate name sue and be sued.
6. Constitution of Gaon Panchayat and Election of President and Vice-
President :-
[1] The Gaon Panchayat shall consist of ten members to be directly elected
by the voters of the territorial constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat area, one
from each constituency in the manner as may be prescribed.
Page 120 of 195
[2] For the convenience of election, the prescribed authority shall in
accordance with such rules as may be prescribed in this behalf by the
Government, divide the area of the Gaon Panchayat into ten territorial
constituencies and allot one seat for each constituency.
[3] The District Commissioner or an officer authorized by the District
Commissioner shall call a meeting of the Gaon Panchayat [which shall be
hereinafter called as the first meeting of the Gaon Panchayat] for election of
a President and a Vice-President respectively from amongst the elected
members of Gaon Panchayat. The District Commissioner shall preside over
the meeting in the manner prescribed. The District Commissioner may
delegate the power to preside over such meeting to any Gazetted Officer
serving in the district.
78. In conformity with the provisions contained in Part-IX of the Constitution, the
Assam Panchayat Act has prescribed for a three-tier Panchayats at the Village
level [Gaon Panchayats], Intermediate level [Anchalik Panchayats] and District
level [Zilla Parishads] in the State which are pyramidically structured in the
following manner :-
Three Tier System of Panchayat Raj
Top-most tier Zilla
District Level
ParishadIntermediate tier Anchalik Panchayat Block Level
Lowest tier Village Level
Gaon Panchayat
Page 121 of 195
79. By the Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act, 2023, a new Section, Section 3A has
been inserted for constitution of a District Delimitation Commission in every
District of the State. The newly inserted Section 3A reads as under :-
3A. Constitution of District Delimitation Commission :-
The Government shall constitute in every district a District Delimitation
Commission to decide the size of Gaon Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat and
Zilla Parishad constituency.
The District Delimitation Commission shall consist of the following members,
namely :-
[a] The District Commissioner – Chairman
[b] The Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad – Member-Secretary
[c] The Election Officer – Member.
80. Though the challenges are made in this batch of writ petitions to the delimitation
of Gaon Panchayats and constituencies/wards of Gaon Panchayats or villages
included in the Gaon Panchayats, a discussion is not expedient in exclusion of
the matters relating to delimitation of Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads,
which are the other two tiers in the hierchical Panchayati Raj Institutions. It is
furthermore necessary as by the Notification dated 03.08.2024, the delimitation
of Panchayats at all the said three levels and reorganization of Blocks were
undertaken.
81. Section 31 and Section 32 which are in Chapter-V titled ‘Establishment and
Constitution of Anchalik Panchayat’ in the Assam Panchayat Act mention about
establishment of Anchalik Panchayat, area of Anchalik Panchayat and
constitution of Anchalik Panchayat respectively. For ready reference, Section 31
and Section 32 are quoted hereinbelow :-
Page 122 of 195
31. Establishment of Anchalik Panchayat and Area of Anchalik
Panchayat: –
[1] For each Development Block there shall be an Anchalik Panchayat
having jurisdiction save as otherwise provided in this Act, over the entire
Development Block jurisdiction excluding such portion of the Block as are
included in a Town Committee and as are included in a Municipality / or under
the authority of Municipal Corporation, a Sanitary Board or Cantonment area
or a notified area constituted under any law for the time being in force :
Provided that a Block may comprise of such villages as are no contiguous or
have no common boundaries and are separated by an area to which this Act
does not extend or in which the remaining sections of this Act, have not come
into force.
32. Constitution of Anchalik Panchayat :-
[1] Every Anchalik Panchayat shall consist of –
[a] One member from each Gaon Panchayat to be directly elected from the
territorial constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat under the jurisdiction of the
Anchalik Panchayat;
[b] The Presidents of the Gaon Panchayats falling within the jurisdiction
ofthe Anchalik Panchayat;
[c] The Members of the House of people and the Members of the Legislative
Assembly of the State representing constituencies which comprise wholly or
partly, the Anchalik Panchayat.
[2] Every member shall have the right to vote whether or not chosen by direct
election in the meetings of the Anchalik Panchayat.
Page 123 of 195
82. Section 64 which is in Chapter-VI titled ‘Establishment and Constitution of Zilla
Parishad’ in the Assam Panchayat Act, has provided for establishment of Zilla
Parishad. Section 65 has provided for constitution of the Zilla Parishad. For ready
reference, Section 64 and Section 65 are quoted hereinbelow :-
64. Establishment of Zilla Parishad :-
[1] For every district there shall be a Zilla Parishad having jurisdiction, save
as otherwise provided in this Act, over the entire district excluding such
portions of the District as are included in a Municipality or a Municipal
Corporation, as the case may be, or under the authority of Town Committee
or Sanitary Board or Cantonment area or any notified area contrary to it under
any law for the time being in force :
Provided that a Zilla Parishad may have its office in any area comprised within
the excluded portion as above of the district and in such area which is notified
by Government for such office, may exercise its powers and functions over
institutions under its control and management.
[2] Every Zilla Parishad shall be a body corporate by the name of
‘________________ Zilla Parishad’ and shall have perpetual succession and
a common seal and subject to such restrictions as are imposed by or under
this or any other enactment with the capacity of suing and being sued in its
corporate name, of acquiring, holding and transferring property movable or
immovable, whether without or within the limit of the area over which it has
authority of entering into contracts and doing all things, necessary, proper or
expedient for the purpose for which it is constituted.
Page 124 of 195
65. Constitution of Zilla Parishad :-
[1] The Zilla Parishad shall consists of :
[i] the members directly elected from the territorial constituencies of the
district :
Provided that Government may be notification in the Official Gazette
determine the territorial constituencies in the district keeping in view the
overall population of the district at a rate of one member for a population not
less than thirty thousand and that each territorial constituency shall elect one
member to the Zilla Parishad through direct election in the manner prescribed
:
Provided further that every Legislative Assembly Constituency shall have four
territorial constituencies and in case of a part of the Legislative Assembly
Constituency with a population less than thirty thousand falling within the
district then this part shall form a territorial Constituency :
Provided further more that the Legislative Assembly Constituency which has
urban population included in a Municipality or a Municipal Corporation as the
case may be or under the authority of Town Committee or Sanitary Board or
Cantonment area or any notified area deemed to be urban area under any
law for the time being in force, may have less than four territorial
constituencies and if the rural population of this Legislative Assembly
Constituency is less than thirty thousand, this may form a territorial
constituency.
[ii] the President of the Anchalik Panchayats;
Page 125 of 195
[iii] the Members of the House of People and the Members of the State
Legislative Assembly representing a part or whole of the district whose
constituencies lie within the district.
[2] All the members shall have the right to vote except the motion of no-
confidence in which only the directly elected members and members
nominated by the Government shall exercise such rights.
XV. Delimitation :-
83. As per the Oxford Dictionary of English, Third Edition, ‘delimit’ means
determine the limits or boundaries of. In the Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth
Edition, the meaning ascribed to the word ‘delimit’ is to mark a boundary; to fix
a limit. As per the Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition, ‘delimitation’ is fixing
of limits or boundaries. In common parlance, ‘delimited’ means to mark or
describe the boundaries or limits of something. ‘Delimitation’ literally means the
act or process of fixing the limits or boundaries of something. By the similar
analogy, delimitation of constituencies would mean the act or process of fixing
the boundaries or limits of territorial constituencies, for example, Parliamentary
Constituencies for the House of the People, or Legislative Assembly
Constituencies in the States or for that matter, constituencies for Panchayats.
84. It is now turn to deal with the contention canvassed by the petitioners that the
procedure outlined in Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, is
the only way for delimitation at the Gaon Panchayat level. As already noted
above, to canvass the point, the learned counsel for the petitioners have
contended that the proviso to Section 5[1] has cast a mandatory obligation to
categorize the districts on the basis of population and since it is the only way for
delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats, the word, ‘may’ appearing in the main
Page 126 of 195
enacting clause on of Section 5[1] has to be held as mandatory. It would,
therefore, be apt to find out the role a proviso plays to the main enacting clause.
XVI. The role of the Proviso to Section 5[1], Assam Panchayat Act, as
amended :-
85. In Justice G.P. Singh’s Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 14th Edition,
it is mentioned that the normal function of a proviso is to except something out
of the enactment or to qualify something enacted therein which but for the
proviso would be within the purview of the enactment.
86. In Shah Bhojraj Kuverji Oil Mills and Ginning Factory [supra], it has been
held to the effect that as a general rule, a proviso is added to an enactment to
qualify or create an exception to what is in the enactment and ordinarily, a
proviso is not interpreted as stating a general rule. But, provisos are often added
not as exceptions or qualifications to the main enactment but as savings clauses,
in which case they will not be construed as controlled by the section. In the said
case, the scope of the proviso which was added to the main enactment as a
savings clause was interpreted to find out the effect of repeal of two Acts. In the
case involved in this batch of writ petitions, the proviso to Section 5[1] is
indubitably not a savings clause. In the Privy Council decision in Thompson
[supra], the House of Lords had observed that a proviso must prima facie be
read and considered in relation to the principal matter to which it is a proviso
and it is not a separate or independent enactment. The words are dependent on
the principal enacting words, to which they are tacked as a proviso and they
cannot be read as divorced from their context.
87. In Dwarka Prasad [supra], it has been observed as a trite law that a proviso
must be limited to the subject-matter of the enacting clause. It is held to be a
settled rule of construction that a proviso must prima facie be read and
considered in relation to the principal matter to which it is a proviso. It is not a
Page 127 of 195
separate or independent enactment. The words used in provisos are dependent
on the principal enacting words, to which they are tacked as provisos. They
cannot be read as divorced from their context. It is prima facie a sound rule of
construction that a proviso should be limited in its operation to the subject-matter
of the enacting clause. To expand the enacting clause, inflated by the proviso,
sins against the fundamental rule of construction that a proviso must be
considered in relation to the principal matter to which it stands as a proviso. A
proviso ordinarily is but a proviso, although the golden rule is to read the whole
section, inclusive of the proviso, in such manner that they mutually throw light
on each other and result in a harmonious construction. It has referred to Maxwel
on Interpretation of Statutes, 10th Edition, wherein it was observed that the
proper course is to apply the broad general rule of construction which is that a
section or enactment must be construed as a whole, each portion throwing light
if need be on the rest. The true principle undoubtedly is, that the sound
interpretation and meaning of the statute, on a view of the enacting clause,
saving clause, and proviso, taken and construed together is to prevail.
88. In Adani Gas Limited [supra], the Hon’ble Supreme Court has referred to the
decision in Dwarka Prasad [supra] and S. Sundaram Pillai [supra] amongst
others. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that a proviso ordinarily, carves
out a field of operation, but does not travel beyond the main enacted provision.
Therefore, the golden rule of interpretation is to read the whole section, inclusive
of the proviso, in such a manner that they mutually throw light on each other
and result in a harmonious construction. A well-established rule of interpretation
of a proviso is that a proviso may have three separate functions. Normally, a
proviso is meant to be an exception to something within the main enactment or
to qualify something enacted therein but in certain cases, the proviso could be
meant to be within the purview of the enactment.
89. In S. Sundaram Pillai and others vs. V.R. Pattabiraman and others , reported
in [1985] 1 SCC 591, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the legal position
Page 128 of 195
on the point a proviso serves seems well-established and the position has been
summed up in the following manner :-
42. …..the legal position seems to be clearly and manifestly well established.
To sum up, a proviso may serve four different purposes:
[1] qualifying or excepting certain provisions from the main enactment;
[2] it may entirely change the very concept of the intendment of the
enactment by insisting on certain mandatory conditions to be fulfilled in order
to make the enactment workable;
[3] it may be so embedded in the Act itself as to become an integral part of
the enactment and thus acquire the tenor and colour of the substantive
enactment itself; and
[4] it may be used merely to act as an optional addenda to the enactment
with the sole object of explaining the real intendment of the statutory provision.
90. To find out the nature, scope and ambit of a proviso, it is always necessary to
read the whole section if it consists of the main enacting clause and a proviso or
provisos or if consists of the main enacting clause, proviso[s] and any
explanation. Then only it can be found out whether, firstly, the proviso has
carved out an exception excepting something out of the main enacting clause;
or secondly, the proviso is a qualifying proviso to qualify something enacted in
the main enacting clause; or thirdly, the proviso is to be treated as part of the
main enacting clause having umbilical link with the main enacting clause; or
fourthly, the proviso insists for fulfillment of certain conditions to make the main
enacting clause operational.
91. Keeping the purposes a proviso may serve in mind, sub-section [1] of Section 5
of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, can be looked at. The provision of
Section 5[1] consists of the main enacting clause and a proviso. As per the main
enacting clause, the State Government, ‘may by notification’, declare ‘any local
Page 129 of 195
area comprising a revenue village or a group of revenue village or a Forest
Villages or a Tea Garden areas or hamlets forming part or revenue village or
Forest Village or Tea Garden area or other such administrative unit or part
thereof’ to be a Gaon Panchayat ‘with population of its territory as per the
category within which it falls’. The proviso has provided that the State
Government shall declare three categories of districts based on population
density or any other relevant factor in the manner mentioned therein. As per the
proviso, the State Government is required to declare three categories of districts
as Category-‘A’ district, Category-‘B’ district and Category-‘C’ district and these
three categories of districts shall have Gaon Panchayats in the following manner
:- [a] Category-‘A’ district having higher population density shall have Gaon
Panchayats with a population range from 10200 to 13800; [b] Category-‘B’
district having medium population density shall have Gaon Panchayats with a
population range from 8500 to 11500, and [c] Category-‘C’ district having lower
population density shall have Gaon Panchayats with a population range from
6000 to 9200.
92. On a plain reading of the main enacting clause and the proviso in amended
Section 5[1] together, it can be noticed that [i] the State Government can declare
‘any local area comprising a revenue village or a group of revenue villages or a
forest village or a tea garden area or hamlets forming part of revenue village or
forest village or tea garden area or other such administrative unit or part thereof’
to be a Gaon Panchayat; [ii] if the State Government decides to declare a Gaon
Panchayat then the population of the territory of such Gaon Panchayat has to be
as per the category of the district within which the Gaon Panchayat falls, with
such a meaning is being borne from the words, ‘with population of its territory
as per the category within which the district falls’ in the main enacting clause;
and [iii] Such a declaration of Gaon Panchayat is to be made by a notification in
the Official Gazette. Prima facie, the proviso has provided the condition to be
fulfilled for a Gaon Panchayat to be declared by the State Government by
notification under the main enacting clause. What has prima facie emerged from
Page 130 of 195
reading the main enacting clause and the proviso together in Section 5[1] is that
if the State Government decides to declare a Gaon Panchayat under sub-section
[1] of Section 5 then such Gaon Panchayat shall have to be formed with the
population range indicated in Clause [a], Clause [b] and Clause [c] respectively
in the proviso, depending on the category of the district wherein the Gaon
Panchayat has been declared. For that purpose, the State Government has to
declare the districts, category-wise, formally or officially based on population
density or any other relevant factor as Category-‘A’ districts, Category-‘B’
districts and Category-‘C’ districts. Declare means to make known formally and
officially. It is only thereafter, the main enacting clause would become workable.
Admittedly, such declaration categorizing the districts based on density of
population has not been made. The expression, ‘any other relevant factor’ has
not been explained by the Legislature in the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended.
In the absence of any proper definition provided by the Legislature to the said
expression, it is difficult to ascribe any meaning to it. But, it is clear that
population density may not the sole criteria for categorization of the districts.
The categorization of districts could be on any other relevant factor. After prima
facie finding out the scope, nature and ambit of the proviso to Section 5[1] in
the afore-stated manner, it is deemed proper, at this juncture, to proceed for a
discussion on the point whether the procedure outlined in amended Section 5[1]
of the Assam Panchayat Act is the only way to be followed for delimitation of
Gaon Panchayats or not, as on this point the contesting parties are also at
variance to each other.
XVII. Whether ‘shall’ in Section 5[1], Assam Panchayat Act is mandatory? :-
93. It is settled proposition that the use of the word, ‘may’ or ‘shall’ in a statutory
provision is not always conclusive. The question whether a particular provision
of a statute is directory or mandatory cannot be resolved by laying down any
general rule applicable for all situations. The issue regarding its directory or
mandatory nature has to be decided by ascertaining the intention of the
Page 131 of 195
legislature and not by examining only at the language of the statutory provision
in which the word, ‘may’ or ‘shall’ appears. It has been exposited to the effect
that for finding out the legislative intent, the court may have to examine the
scheme of the Act, purpose and object underlying the provision, consequences
likely to ensue or inconvenience likely to result if the provision is read one way
or the other and many more considerations relevant to the issue.
94. In Montreal Street Railway Company [supra], it was held that no general rule
can be laid down to examine the question whether a particular provision in a
statute is directory or imperative and in every case, the object of the statute
must be looked at. It was observed that when the provisions of a statute relate
to the performance of a public duty and the case is such that to hold null and
void acts done in neglect of the duty would work serious general inconvenience,
or injustice to persons who have no control over those entrusted with the duty,
and at the same time, would not promote the main object of the Legislature, it
has been the practice to hold such provisions to be directory only, the neglect of
them, though punishable, not affecting the validity of the acts done.
95. In Bachahan Devi [supra], the following interpretation given in Administrative
Law, 9th Edition of Wade & Forsyth has been referred to :-
‘The hallmark of discretionary power is permissive language using words such
as ‘may’ or ‘it shall be lawful’, as opposed to obligatory language such as
‘shall’. But this simple distinction is not always a sure guide, for there have
been many decisions in which permissive language has been construed as
obligatory. This is not so much because one form of words is interpreted to
mean its opposite, as because the power conferred is, in the circumstances,
prescribed by the Act, coupled with a duty to exercise it in a proper case.’
Page 132 of 195
96. The following discussion in Bachahan Devi vs. Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur,
[2008] 12 SCC 372, on the issue how to interpret a provision containing ‘may’
or ‘shall’ is of relevance and import :-
17. The question, whether a particular provision of a statute, which, on the
face of it, appears mandatory inasmuch as it used the word ‘shall’, or is merely
directory, cannot be resolved by laying down any general rule, but depends
upon the facts of each case particularly on a consideration of the purpose and
object of the enactment in making the provision. To ascertain the intention,
the court has to examine carefully the object of the statute, consequence that
may follow from insisting on a strict observance of the particular provision and,
above all, the general scheme of the other provisions of which it forms a part.
The purpose for which the provision has been made, the object to be attained,
the intention of the legislature in making the provision, the serious
inconvenience or injustice which may result in treating the provision one way
or the other, the relation of the provision to other consideration which may
arise on the facts of any particular case, have all to be taken into account in
arriving at the conclusion whether the provision is mandatory or directory. Two
main considerations for regarding a rule as directory are : [i] absence of any
provision for the contingency of any particular rule not being complied with or
followed, and [ii] serious general inconvenience and prejudice to the general
public would result if the act in question is declared invalid for non-compliance
with the particular rule.
* * * * * *
21. The ultimate rule in construing auxiliary verbs like ‘may’ and ‘shall’ is to
discover the legislative intent; and the use of the words ‘may’ and ‘shall’ is
not decisive of its discretion or mandates. The use of the words ‘may’ and
‘shall’ may help the courts in ascertaining the legislative intent without giving
Page 133 of 195
to either a controlling or a determinating effect. The courts have further to
consider the subject-matter, the purpose of the provisions, the object
intended to be secured by the statute which is of prime importance, as also
the actual words employed.
22. ‘9. … Obviously where the legislature uses two words ‘may’ and ‘shall’
in two different parts of the same provision prima facie it would appear that
the legislature manifested its intention to make one part directory and
another mandatory. But that by itself is not decisive.’
The power of court to find out whether the provision is directory or
mandatory remains unimpaired.
97. From the above exposition, it emerges that where the legislature uses two words,
‘may’ and ‘shall’ in two different parts of the same provision prima facie it would
appear that the legislature manifested its intention to make one part directory
and another mandatory. But that by itself is not decisive. It is still within the
domain of the court to find out whether the provision is directory or mandatory.
To find out the real intent, the court has to consider the subject-matter as a
whole, the purpose of the provisions, and the object intended to be secured by
the statute.
98. It has not been laid down in Section 5[1] or in any other provisions of the Assam
Panchayat Act as to what would be the effect if there is omission on the part of
the State Government to declare a Gaon Panchayat in the manner provided in
Section 5[1]. In other words, there is no other provision in the Assam Panchayat
Act providing for the consequences, which would be fall if a Gaon Panchayat is
not formed in terms of amended Section 5[1].
99. The provisions contained in the main enacting provision of Section 5[1] clearly
gives an impression that the provision is directory in nature because of the use
Page 134 of 195
of the word, ‘may’ therein but in view of the principles discernible from the
precedents it is not to be accepted readily that the provision is directory in nature.
There has been a persuasive discourse from the side of the petitioners that the
provision contained in Section 5[1] despite use of the word, ‘may’ is mandatory
in nature and therefore, it is the only way to delimit at the level of Gaon
Panchayat. On the other hand, it has been contended on behalf of the State
respondents that the provision contained in Section 5[1] is not the only way to
delimit the Gaon Panchayats. In support, reference has been made to the
provisions contained in the Assam Panchayat Act for delimitation of Panchayats
at all the three levels. Therefore, an analysis of the other related provisions of
the Assam Panchayat Act has become inevitable. One of the objects would be to
find out about the intention behind the provision and also about any other way
of meeting the situation and delimiting the Panchayats when the procedure in
Section 5[1] is not followed.
XVIII. Article 243O[a] of the Constitution & Section 129[a] of the Assam
Panchayat Act :-
100. Article 243O, which is in Part-IX of the Constitution, contains a bar to
interference by courts in electoral matters. The Article 249O corresponds to
Article 329 of Part-XV and Article 243ZG of Part-IXA. The provisions contained
in Section 129 of the Assam Panchayat Act are akin to Article 243O. For ready
reference, Article 243O and Article 329 of the Constitution as well as Section 129
of the Assam Panchayat Act are quoted hereinbelow :-
243O. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters. –
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution –
[a] the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies
or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be
made under Article 243K, shall not be called in question in any court;
Page 135 of 195
[b] no election to any Panchayat shall be called in question except by
an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is
provided for by or under any law by the Legislative of a State.
329. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters. –
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution –
[a] the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies
or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be
made under Article 327 or Article 328, shall not be called in question in any
court;
[b] no election to either House of Parliament or to the House or either
by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as
may be provided for by or under any law by the appropriate Legislative.
129. Bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters. –
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act –
[a] the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies
on the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made under Article 243
of the Constitution of India shall not be called in question in any court;
[b] no election to any Panchayat shall be called in question except by
an election petition presented within sixty days from the date of declaration
of election results to the Tribunal constituted under Section 127.
101. Clause [a] of Article 243O of the Constitution and Clause [a] of Section 129 of
the Assam Panchayat Act, both of which operate with a non-obstante clause,
have created a bar for courts to interfere with the State enactment dealing with
delimitation of constituencies and allocation of seats. The process of delimitation
of constituencies and finalization of electoral roll is independent from the process
of election. The term, ‘election’ is interpreted broadly to include all steps and
proceedings commencing from the date of notification of election till the date of
Page 136 of 195
declaration of results. In view of Article 243O[a] of the Constitution and Section
129[a] of the Assam Panchayat Act, the validity of the relevant provisions
contained in Section 5, Section 6, Section 31, Section 32, Section 64 and Section
65 of the Assam Panchayat Act concerning delimitation of Zilla Parishads,
Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon Panchayats and its constituencies cannot be
called in question in a court of law. Part-IX of the Constitution and the provisions
of the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended, do not, however, contain anything to
the effect that once an exercise is completed following them, the process so
finalized would attain the force of law so as not to be questioned in a court of
law.
XIX. The contents of the Notification dated 15.10.2024 :-
102. For appreciation of the issue further, it appears necessary to look into the
contents of the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, which were also published in
the Assam Gazette. As a sample, the Notification no. File no. PDA.4/2024/GP/8
dated 15.10.2024 issued by the Panchayat & Rural Development Department,
Government of Assam for the district of Cachar which was published in the
Assam Gazette in Issue no. 526 dated 24.10.2024, is taken for analysis. For the
sake of brevity, the relevant parts from the said Notification concerning Sonai
Anchalik Panchayat and Banskandi Anchalik Panchayat are reproduced
hereinbelow :-
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DISPUR ::: GUWAHATI-6ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
NOTIFICATIONFile No. PDA.4/2024/GP/8 Dated Dispur the 15th October, 2024
Page 137 of 195In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the
Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [as amended] and in pursuance to the Cabinet
decision taken in its meeting held on 08.10.2024; the Governor of Assam is
pleased to notify the following Gaon Panchayats along with their corresponding
villages under Cachar District :
Sl. Name of the Name of Gaon Name of Villages
No. Anchalik Panchayat Panchayat
11 Banskandi Chiripar Chandrapur Pt. III
Monipur Chandrapur Pt. IV
Chiripar Pt. II
Lalong Pt. IV
Monipur Pt. I
Monipur Pt. II
Niz Lakhipur Pt. III
Ujan Tarapur[Uzan
Tarapur]
Gobindapur Algapur Pt. I
Algapur Algapur Pt. II
Gobindapur Pt. I
Gobindapur Pt. II
Gobindapur - Badripar
Banskandi Durgapur
Gobindapur Pt. III
Niz Banskandi Pt. II
Niz Banskandi Pt. III
Ratanpur
Krishnapur Dakshin Krishnapur
Page 138 of 195
Dhamalia
Saidpur Pt. I
Uttar Krishnapur Pt. II
Uttar Krishnapur Pt. IV
Neairgram Badripar Pt. IV
Bagpur Bagpur Pt. I
Bagpur Pt. II
Bagpur Pt. III
Neairgram Pt. I
Neairgram Pt. II
Satkorakandi Dhanchari Pt. I
Dungripar Pt. I
Jhanjarbali
[Jhanjambali]
Satkorakandi Pt. I
Satkorakandi Pt. II
Sibpur Niz Rupairbali
Sibpur Pt. I
Sibpur Pt. II
Singerbond Pt. I
Singerbond Pt. II
Sonabarighat Barknagar Pt. I
Saidpur Pt. II
Sonabarighat Pt. I.
Sonabarighat Pt. II
West Singerbond Pt. III
Singerbond Singerbond Pt. IV
12 Sonai Baorikandi Bhaurikandi Pt. I [Bhandri]
Bhaurikandi Pt. II
Page 139 of 195
Bidrohipar
Kachudaram Pt. IV
Nutun Kanchanpur
Sundari Pt. I
Sundari Pt. II
Dakshin Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. I
Mohanpur Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. II
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. III
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. IX
Gobindanagar Pt. I
Gobindanagar Pt. II
Rangirghat Pt. III
Dakshin Dhancheri Pt. II
Saidpur Dhancheri Pt. III
Saidpur Pt. III
Saidpur Pt. IV
Saidpur Pt. V
Sildubi
Didarkush Baolihaor
Didarkush Pt. I
Didarkush Pt. II
Didarkush Pt. III
Didarkush Pt. IV
Kachudaram Pt. III
Kachudaram Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. IV
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. V
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. VI
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. VIII
Kachudaram Pt. I
Page 140 of 195
Kachudaram Pt. II
Kaptanpur Kaptanpur Pt. XVI
Kaptanpur Pt. XII
Kaptanpur Pt. XIII
Kaptanpur Pt. XIV
Kaptanpur Pt. XV
Kaptanpur Pt. XVII
Kaptanpur Pt. XVIII
Nutun Ramnagar Pt.I
[Nutanramnagar Pt. I]
Kazidahar Berabak Pt. II
Kazidahar Pt. I
Kazidahar Pt. II
Kazidahar Pt. III
Menipur Pt. II
Nagdirgram Berabak Pt. III
Chandpur Nagdirgram Pt. I
Nagdirgram Pt. III
Nagdirgram Pt. IV
Swadhin Bazar Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. VII
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. X
Dakshin Mohanpur Pt. XI
Nutun Ramnagar Pt. IV
Nutun Ramnagar Pt. V
103. The Notifications further mentioned the names of the Gaon Panchayats which
have been included within the territorial jurisdiction of each Anchalik Panchayat
and also the names of the villages under each of the Gaon Panchayats. In view
Page 141 of 195of the categorical stand of the State Government that the provisions contained
in amended Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act have not been resorted to
in the delimitation and reorganization process undertaken pursuant to the
Notification dated 03.08.2024, questions would definitely arise as to whether the
State Government can do so exercising the power under Section 5[2] of the
Assam Panchayat Act and whether the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, would
serve the overall object and purpose without falling foul of the amended Section
5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act and the constitutional principle.
104. Section 141 of the Assam Panchayat Act has provided the power to make rules.
As per sub-section [1] of Section 141, the State Government may make rules for
carrying out the purposes and objects of the Assam Panchayat Act. The Assam
Panchayat [Constitution] Rules, 1995 have been framed in exercise of the powers
conferred by sub-section [1] of Section 141 of the Assam Panchayat Act. The
Assam Panchayat [Constitution] Rules, 1995 [‘the Rules, 1995’ or ‘the 1995
Rules’, for short] came into force from 06.05.1994. Rule 6 of the Rules, 1995
had provided for delimitation of the constituencies in a Gaon Panchayat.
105. Sub-section [1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, had been amended by
Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act, 2023 w.e.f. 19.10.2023.
There had, however, been no corresponding changes to the related rule, that is,
Rule 6[1] of the 1995 Rules simultaneously. Substitution of corresponding Rule
6[1] had only been made vide Notification no. EFC-596015/2 dated 24.12.2024,
which was after the delimitation and reorganization process under reference. It
means that at the time when Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act came to
be amended, there was no corresponding commensurate rule in the 1995 Rules
for it. Any amendment to any statutory provisions is considered, in general, to
be prospective in nature, unless it is specifically stated to be operative
retrospectively. Such is not the case here.
Page 142 of 195
106. During the course of the hearing, it was noticed that in the Notification bearing
no. E-449396 dated 03.08.2024 whereby the process of delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in the State of Assam was
commenced, it was stated therein that the ECI Notification dated 11.08.2023
would be diligently referred to for the source of Gaon Panchayats and villages
falling in a Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC] as a criteria for delimitation
of Gaon Panchayats. In Clause 7 of the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP], it
mentioned about delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats, Zilla
Parishads and Block reorganization. It was further mentioned that the LAC-wise
Task Forces were to execute the delimitation and reorganization process at the
LAC level and the Task Forces were to collect the LAC-wise list of villages and
the names of the respective Gaon Panchayats from the concerend District
Delimitation Commission, as notified by the ECI in LAC delimitation. It was
further mentioned that once the village lists were collected, the Gaon Panchayats
were to be assigned against each village. The Notifications, dated 15.10.2024,
alone did not throw much light about delimitation of Zilla Parishads and Anchalik
Panchayats and Block reorganization, other than naming the Anchalik
Panchayats along with the Gaon Panchayats and the villages within them. It
cannot be lost sight of the fact that in view of three-tier structure of Panchayati
Raj Institutions, the process of delimitation of Zilla Parishads and Anchalik
Panchayats are intricately intertwined with the delimitation process of Gaon
Panchayats. As all the pieces with regard to delimitation of Panchayats at all the
three levels did not seem to have fallen in places only from a perusal of the
Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, this Court, to clarify the situation, had to ask
the State respondents to furnish information to the Court as to whether with the
delimitation process of Gaon Panchayats initiated by the Notification dated
03.08.2024 and following the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] formulated
therein reorganization of Development Blocks and delimitation of Anchalik
Panchayats/Zilla Parishads were also simultaneously undertaken, as
contemplated in the Notification dated 03.08.2024.
Page 143 of 195
107. In response, a set of Notifications issued under sub-section [1] of Section 31 of
the Assam Panchayat Act and under sub-section [1] of Section 65 of the Assam
Panchayat Act by the Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Government
of Assam, published in the Assam Gazette, have been placed before and brought
to the notice of the Court. Another set of Gazette Notifications whereby
Development Blocks throughout the State of Assam have been reorganized,
have also been placed before and brought to the notice of the Court. On perusal,
it is found that the Gazette Notifications were published separately for each of
the districts.
108. As the issues raised in these petitions are argued by the parties on the basis of
constitutional principles and statutory provisions, it was expected that the parties
would place all the details which are relevant and material for adjudication of
the issues in a proper manner. Though the parties have extensively argued as
regard the delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, the parties should have placed all
the materials as regards delimitation of Panchayats at all the three levels for a
fair adjudication since the delimitation of Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats
and Gaon Panchayats undertaken together along with reorganization of
Development Blocks had possibility of impacting the delimitation process of the
Gaon Panchayats, for the reasons already mentioned hereinabove. It should
have been easily comprehensible to the parties that when the court would be
faced with the task to decide on the issue of delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, it
would not be possible for the court to decide the issue without having any
knowledge about the delimitation process of the other two higher tiers of
Panchayati Raj Institutions, that is, Anchalik Panchayat and Zilla Parishad, along
with reorganisation of Development Blocks, if it had taken place simultaneously.
When after delimitation of Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads, notifications
were published in the Assam Gazette in exercise of statutory powers, it would
have been just and fair on the part of the contesting parties to place those
Gazette notifications before the court at the first instance.
Page 144 of 195
109. As per Section 2[6] of the Assam Panchayat Act, ‘notification’ means a
notification published in the Official Gazette. As defined in Section 2[33], ‘State
Government’ means the Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department, Assam. The object of publication of an order in the Official Gazette
is two-fold, firstly, to give information to public; and secondly, it is the official
confirmation of the making of such an order. As it is published under the
authority of the Government, such publication of an order is the official
confirmation as regards the order and the version as printed in the Official
Gazette is final. The Courts can refer to the Official Gazette whenever there
arises a doubt or a situation for clarification. The Court can take judicial notice
of what is published in the Official Gazette. Section 81 of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872 and Section 80 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 mention
that the Court shall presume the genuineness of the Official Gazette.
XX. ECI’s Order notified vide Notification dated 11.08.2023 :-
110. The Notification no. E-449396/18 dated 03.08.2024 had specifically mentioned
that the ECI’s Order notified vide Notification no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated
11.08.2023 was to be diligently referred to for source of Gaon Panchayats and
villages falling in a Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC].
111. All the Legislative Assembly Constituencies [LACs] and Parliamentary
Constituencies in the State of Assam were divided and delimited by the ECI’s
Order notified videthe Notification dated 11.08.2023 on the basis of the 2001
Census, as provided in Article 82 and Article 170 of the Constitution read with
the Delimitation Act, 2002 and the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The
Census figures of 2001, as published by the Census Commissioner, had only
been considered for that purpose. The number of seats in the Legislative
Assembly in the State of Assam have been kept intact as earlier at one hundred
and twenty-six [126] and the number of seats allocated in the House of People
[Lok Sabha] for the State of Assam have been retained as fourteen [14]. The
Page 145 of 195
sole reason is that Article 82 and Article 170 have laid down that the number of
seats in the Legislative Assembly of each State and the allocation of seats in the
Lok Sabha to the States shall not be altered until the relevant figures for the first
Census taken after the year 2026 have been published. It definitely has a
connection with incorporation of Clause 4[ii] in the Notification dated
03.08.2024. Thus, it is evident that the delimitation exercise carried out by the
ECI, which had culminated vide the Notification dated 11.08.2023, wason the
basis of the population figures of the 2001 Census. It is not placed before this
court when any delimitation process of Panchayat areas was previously
undertaken.
112. In the earlier part, the facts stated in some of the writ petitions have been
alluded to and one of those writ petitions is the writ petition, W.P.[C.] no.
5346/2024. In the writ petition, the petitioners have referred to [i] Sonai LAC;
[ii] Barkhola LAC; and [iii] Lakhipur LAC.
113. The ECI Notification no. 282/AS/2023 [DEL]/Vol.V dated 11.08.2023, which was
the basis of the Notification dated 03.08.2024 as well as the SOP, has described
the extent of each of the one hundred and twenty-six [126] LACs in Table-A
thereof. In order to understand the actual scenario, it appears apposite to extract
the territorial extent of Sonai LAC:-
29. DISTRICT – CACHAR
Sr. Name of LAC Extent
119 Sonai Sonai M.B, Banskandi Dev. Block [Part] – Banskandi Dev. Block
excluding – Palorbond G.P, Dolugram G.P., Badri Chandpur G.P.
[Part] – Niz-Banskandi Pt IV, Chandrapur Pt II, Chandrapur Pt 1
[Chandrapur Pt II], Niz-Banskandi Pt I, Tarapur Monipur G.P
[Part] – Tarapur Grant, Dungripar G.P. [Part] – Dungripar Pt II,
Badripar G.P. [Part] – Badripar Pt 1, Badripar Pt II, Badripar Pt
Page 146 of 195III, Gangapur, Badripar Pt V [Dadripar Pt V [Badrapar V]],
Binnakandi Dev. Block [Part]- Rupaibali G.P., Singerbond
G.P.[Part] – Singerbond Pt IV, Binnakandi Bagan G.P.[Part] –
Kaptanpur Pt XII, Kaptanpur G.P.[Part] – Kaptanpur Pt XIII,
Kaptanpur Pt XV, Kaptanpur Pt XVI, Kaptanpur Pt
XVII.Kaptanpur Pt XVIII, Kaptanpur Pt XIV, Lakhipur Dev. Block
[Part] – Lakhipur Nayagram G.P. [Part]- Niz-Lakhipur Pt III,
Chiripar Pt II, Sribar G.P. [Part] – Lalang Pt IV, Narsingpur Dev.
Block [Part] – Chandpur G.P., Kazidahar G.P. [Part] – Berabak Pt
II, Kajidahar Pt II, Kajidahar Pt III, Nagdirgram G.P. [Part] –
Nagdirgram Pt III, Nagdirgram Pt IV, Palonghat Dev. Block [Part]
– Didarkhush G.P., Silchar Dev.Block [Part] – Berenga G.P.,
Neargram Bagpur G.P., Bhagadahar Borjurai G.P., Sonai Dev.
Block [Part] – SonaiDev. Block excluding-Nutan Ramnagar
G.P.[Part] – Nutan Ramnagar Pt II [Nutanramnagar Pt II], Nutan
Ramnagar Pt III [Nutanramnagar Pt III], Dakshin Saidpur
G.P.[Part] – Menipur Pt I, Sildubi G.P.[Part] – Sildubi Grant,
Dakshin Krishnapur G.P. [Part] – Uttar Krishnapur Pt III, Uttar
Krishnapur G.P. [Part] -Sabashpur [Sabujpur], Sildubi G.P [Part]
– Bariknagar Pt II, Uttar Krishnapur G.P.[Part] -Uttar Krishnapur
Pt I [Uttar Krishnapur Part I (CT)], Sundari G.P [Part] – Sundari
Pt IV. Sundari Pt III.
114. From a closer scrutiny of the territorial extent of Sonai LAC of Cachar district, it
is easily discernible that after the LAC delimitation exercise carried out by the
ECI, the areas of many of the erstwhile Development Blocks stood divided and
got excluded from the territorial extent of Sonai LAC. Similarly, many Gaon
Panchayat areas, either entirely with all the villages or partially with some of the
villages, stood excluded from few erstwhile Development Blocks and got
Page 147 of 195
excluded from the territorial extent of Sonai LAC. The excluded parts of these
Development Block[s] and the Gaon Panchayat areas were obviously to be
included in some other Development Block[s] and Gaon Panchayat[s] in other
LAC[s]. Similar changes occurred in all the other LACs.
115. If the example of Banskandi Development Block within Sonai LAC is taken, it can
be seen that entire areas of erstwhile Banskandi Development Block is not now
part of Sonai LAC but only a part of its had been retained in Sonai LAC. The
entire areas of Palorbond Gaon Panchayat and Dolugram Gaon Panchayat had
been excluded from the territorial extent of Banskandi Development Block/Sonai
LAC. Meaning thereby, the areas of the two Gaon Panchayats had been included
in the areas of other Development Block[s] and LAC[s]. Similarly, a part of the
areas of Badri Chandpur Gaon Panchayat comprising of the villages – Niz-
Banskandi Pt IV, Chandrapur Pt II, Chandrapur Pt 1 [Chandrapur Pt II], Niz-
Banskandi Pt I – had been excluded from the territorial extent of Banskandi
Development Block/Sonai LAC and consequently, Banskandi Anchalik Panchayat.
Similarly, a part of the areas of Tarapur Monipur Gaon Panchayat comprising of
the village – Tarapur Grant – had been excluded from the territorial extent of
Banskandi Development Block/Sonai LACand consequently, Banskandi Anchalik
Panchayat. A part of the areas of Dungirpar Gaon Panchayat comprising of the
village – Dungripar Pt II – had been excluded from the territorial extent of
Banskandi Development Block/Sonai LAC and consequently, Banskandi Anchalik
Panchayat. A part of the areas of Badripar Gaon Panchayat comprising of the
villages – Badripar Pt 1, Badripar Pt II, Badripar Pt III, Gangapur, Badripar Pt V
[Dadripar Pt V [Badrapar V] – had been excluded from the territorial extent of
Banskandi Development Block/Sonai LACand consequently, Banskandi Anchalik
Panchayat. Obviously, there excluded areas were included in areas in other
Development Block[s] and consequently, other Anchalik Panchayat[s] and other
LAC[s].
Page 148 of 195
116. Similar changes and divisions had occurred in the other erstwhile
Development Blocks also, as indicated for Banskandi Development Block in
the manner in the Table below. The areas of erstwhile Banskandi
Development Block which was earlier entirely within Sonai LAC, are now
included into territorial areas of atleast three LACs [Lakhipur LAC, Udarbond
LAC & Sonai LAC]. Palorbond Gaon Panchayat area has been was included
within Lakhipur LAC whereas Dolugram Gaon Panchayat area has been
included within Udarbond LAC. In case of few Gaon Panchayats, some of the
villages included earlier within those Gaon Panchayats were divided into areas
of two or more LACs. Similarly, the areas of erstwhile Binakandi Development
Block fell into atleast three LACs [Lakhipur LAC, Sonai LAC & Dholai (SC)
LAC]. On further scrutiny, it is noticed that as a result of inclusion of areas of
the Development Blocks into areas of different LACs, the areas of different Gaon
Panchayats within such Development Blocks, in some cases, had also been
simultaneously included in different LACs partly.
Cachar district
Banskandi Development Block
114 no. Lakhipur LAC 115 no. Udharbond LAC 119 no. Sonai LAC
Palorbond G.P., Badri Dolugram G.P., Badripar Banskandi Dev. Block, Block
Chandpur G.P. [Part] – G.P. [Part] – Badripar Pt I, excluding – Palorbond G.P.,
Niz-Banskandi Pt I, Badripar Pt II, Badripar Pt Dolugram G.P., Badri
Tarapur Monipur G.P. III, Gangapur, Badripar Pt V Chandpur G.P. [Part] – Niz-
[Part] – Tarapur grant, [Dadripar Pt V [Badrapar Banskandi Pt IV, Chandrapur
Dungripar G.P. [Part] – V]], Badri Chandpur G.P. Pt II, Chandrapur Pt I
Dungripar Pt II. [Part] – Niz-Banskandi Pt [Chandrapur Pt II], Niz-
IV, Chandrapur Part II, Banskandi Pt I, Tarapur
Chandrapur Pt I Monipur G.P. [Part] - Tarapur
[Chandrapur Pt II]. grant, Dungripar G.P. [Part] -
Page 149 of 195
Dungripar Pt II, Badripar G.P.
[Part] - Badripar Pt I, Badripar
Pt II, Badripar Pt III,
Gangapur, Badripar Pt V
[Dadripar Pt V [Badrapar V].
XXI. The Delimitation of Zila Parishads:-
117. The State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department had
issued a Notification bearing no. PDA.7/2024/ZPC/8 dated 21.10.2024 for the
district of Cachar in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section [1] of Section
65 of the Assam Panchayat Act. Similar notifications were issued in respect of
the other districts. By the Notification dated 21.10.2024 [supra], which was
published in the Assam Gazette in Issue no. 602 dated 14.11.2024, the State
Government had notified the Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPCs] along with
their corresponding Gaon Panchayats in each ZPC. The Notification pertained to
Cachar district whereby the Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPCs] for all the seven
Legislative Assembly Constituencies [LACs] of Cachar had been notified. The
relevant excerpts of the said Notification pertaining to Sonai LAC appear as under
:-
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
The 21st October, 2024No. PDA.7/2024/ZPC/8.- In exercise of the power conferred under sub-
section [1] of Section 65 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [as amended]
read with sub-rule [1] of Rule 8 of the Assam Panchayat [Constitution] Rules,
Page 150 of 1951995 [as amended] and in pursuance to the Cabinet decision taken in its
meeting held on 8th October, 2024, the Governor of Assam is pleased to
notify the following Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPC] along with their
corresponding Gaon Panchayats under Cachar District.
Sl Name of LAC Name of Zilla Parishad Name of Gaon Panchayat
No. Constituency
6. 119 - Sonai Bagpur Sonabarighat Dakshin Saidpur
Krishnapur
Neairgram Bagpur
Sonabarighat
Didarkosh Nagdirgram Baorikandi
Didakush
Kachudaram
Nagdirgram Chandpur
Swadhin Bazar
Kaptanpur Kazidhar Dakshin Mohanpur
Kaptanpur
Kazidahar
Satkorakandi
Sibpur Banskandi Chiripar Monipur
Gobindapur Algapur
Gobindapur - Banskandi
Sibpur
West Singerbond
118. As per the prescription contained in sub-section [1] of Section 64 of the Assam
Panchayat Act, for every district there shall be a Zilla Parishad having jurisdiction,
save as otherwise provided in the Assam Panchayat Act, over the entire district.
Page 151 of 195
The territorial area of a Zilla Parishad is not always co-terminus with the
territorial area of the concerned district as the portions of the district which are
included in a Municipality or a Municipal Corporation or under the authority of
Town Committee or Sanitary Board or Cantonment area or any notified area
have to be excluded. As per the first proviso to Clause [i] of sub-section [1] of
Section 65 of the Assam Panchayat Act, the Government may be notification in
the Official Gazette determine the territorial constituencies in the district keeping
in view the overall population of the district at a rate of one member for a
population not less than thirty-thousand. In the second proviso to Clause [i] of
sub-section [1] of Section 65 of the Assam Panchayat Act, it is provided that
every Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC] shall have four territorial
constituencies and in case of a part of the LAC with a population less than thirty-
thousand falling within the district then that part shall form a territorial
constituency of the Zilla Parishad. The LAC delimitation made vide ECI’s Order
dated 11.08.2023 had a clear connection with and effect on the delimitation of
Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPCs] and it had obvious ripple effect also on the
Gaon Panchayats, which were previously declared and established with the
villages comprising within them. By the third proviso to Section 65 [1] [i] of the
Assam Panchayat Act, it is laid down that if a particular LAC has urban population
included in a Municipality or a Municipal Corporation or under the authority of
any Town Committee or any Sanitary Board or any Cantonment or any notified
area deemed to be urban area, then that LAC can have less than four territorial
constituencies of Zilla Parishad and if the rural population of that particular LAC
is less than thirty-thousand, it may form a territorial constituency of the Zilla
Parishad.
119. The Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] set forth in the Notification dated
03.08.2024 had provided for delimitation of the Zilla Parishads. By taking into
purview the provisions contained in Section 65 [1] [i] of the Assam Panchayat
Act, the SOP had laid down the procedure for delimitation of territorial
constituencies of a Zilla Parishad. As per the SOP, [i] A territorial constituency of
Page 152 of 195
Zilla Parishad [ZPC] would belong to only one LAC, [ii] In case of 100% rural
population in an LAC, the LAC shall have four territorial constituencies [ZPC] at
a rate of one member for a population of not less than thirty thousand and [iii]
in case of an LAC having rural and urban population, each ZPC would constitute
with not less than thirty thousand rural population and that LAC may have less
than four territorial constituencies and if the rural population of this Legislative
Assembly Constituency was less than thirty thousand, this may form only one
territorial constituency. From the above, it is discernible that the statutory
provision for delimitation of territorial constituencies of the Zilla Parishad seems
to have an in-built mechanism for adhering to the constitutional principle
regarding maintaining of the same ratio, as far as practicable.
120. By the ECI’s Order notified vide the Notification dated 11.08.2023, delimitation
and division of the Legislative Assembly Constituencies [LACs] in the State of
Assam was carried out. The Notification also mentioned about the nos. of LACs
for each of the districts. It can be seen from the Notification dated 03.08.2024,
the Panchayati Raj system is prevalent in twenty-seven nos. of districts in the
State of Assam. In the Notification dated 03.08.2024, the nos. of ZPCs in each
district were also mentioned.
121. It is discernible from the afore-mentioned Notification issued under Section 65[1]
of the Assam Panchayat Act, the State Government while notifying and delimiting
the Zilla Parishad Constituencies [ZPCs], had also notified the Gaon Panchayats,
which are within each of the ZPC. As per Rule 8[1] of the 1995 Rules, the State
Government after declaration of a Zilla Parishad is empowered delimit the Zilla
Parishad Constituencies as per Section 65[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. Under
Rule 8[1] of the Rules, 1995, which attracts the bar under Article 243O[a] of the
Constitution and Section 129[a] of the Assam Panchayat Act, the State
Government has to ensure that no Gaon Panchayat falls in two ZPCs. It is obvious
that the delimitation of a ZPC is not possible without mentioning the extent of
the area within it and the extent of a ZPC can be best described by the Gaon
Page 153 of 195
Panchayats with the villages, included within the ZPC. Therefore, in so declaring
the extents of the ZPCs, the State Government is empowered also to declare the
Gaon Panchayats along with the villages within them, as the Gaon Panchayats
were already in existence, which would be within each of the ZPCs. In such view
of the matter, it cannot be said that the act of the delimiting the ZPCs mentioning
of the names of the Gaon Panchayats with the villages within them which would
fall under the respective ZPC, is in breach of any statutory provision.
XXII. Delimitation of Anchalik Panchayats & Gaon Panchayats vis-à-vis the
SOP :-
122. The State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department had
also reorganized the Development Blocks in each of the districts and notified the
Development Blocks, after reorganization, along with their Head Quarters and
corresponding Gaon Panchayats under each of the districts of Assam for
administrative exigency and smooth implementation of the development
schemes undertaken by the State as well as the Central Government. Such
Notifications were published in the Assam Gazette. In respect of Cachar district,
the Development Blocks, after reorganization, along with their Head Quarters
and corresponding Gaon Panchayats were notified vide a Notification no.
PDA.6/2024/DB/8 dated 19.10.2024 and the Notification was published in the
Assam Gazette in Issue no. 608 dated 14.11.2024. The following is an extract
from the said Notification regarding re-organised Banskandi Development Block
and Sonai Development Block to make the situation more clear to understand
the process of reorganization of the Development Blocks. :-
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTNOTIFICATION
Page 154 of 195The 19th October, 2024
No. PDA.6/2024/DB/8. -For administrative expediency and smooth
implementation of various rural development scheme undertaken by the
State as well as Central Government and in pursuance to the Cabinet
decision taken in its meeting held on 8th October, 2024; the Governor of
Assam is pleased to notify the following Development Blocks along with
their Head Quarters and corresponding Gaon Panchayats under Cachar
District.
Sl. Nameof Name of Development Name of Gaon Panchayat
No. Development Block Block Head Quarter
11 Banskandi Bankskandi Development Chiripar Monipur
Block, Village - Banskandi Gobindapur Algapur
Pt - II, P.O. - Banskandi, Gobindapur-Banskandi
Pin - 788101 Krishnapur
Neairgram Bagpur
Satkorakandi
Sibpur
Sonbarighat
West Singerbond
12 Sonai Sonai Development Block, Baorikandi
Village - Kaptanpur, Pt - Dakshin Mohanpur
XVIII, P.O. - Sonai Mukh, Dakshin Saidpur
G.P. - Kaptanpur, Pin - Didarkush
788119 Kachudaram
Kaptanpur
Kazidahar
Nagdirgram Chandpur
Swadhin Bazar
Page 155 of 195
123. With the reorganization of the Development Blocks in the districts the State
Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department had also
simultaneously issued Notifications exercising powers conferred under sub-
section [1] of Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act to notify the Anchalik
Panchayats along with their corresponding Gaon Panchayats in each of the
districts of Assam and these Notifications were also published in the Assam
Gazette. In respect of Cachar district, the Anchalik Panchayats along with their
corresponding Gaon Panchayats were notified vide a Notficaiton no.
PDA.5/2024/AP/8 dated 19.10.2024 and the Notification was published in the
Assam Gazette in Issue no. 648 dated 14.11.2024. The following are the
excerpts pertaining to Banskandi Anchalik Panchayat and Sonai Anchalik
Panchayat from the Notification.
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ORDERS BY THE GOVERNOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
The 19th October, 2024
No. PDA.5/2024/AP/8. – In exercise of the power conferred under sub-
section [1] of Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [as amended]
and in pursuance to the Cabinet decision taken in its meeting held on 8th
October, 2024, the Governor of Assam is pleased to notify the following
Anchalik Panchayats along with their corresponding Gaon Panchayats
under Cachar District.
Sl. No. Name of the Anchalik Panchayat Name of Gaon Panchayat
11 Banskandi Chiripar Monipur
Page 156 of 195
Gobindapur Algapur
Gobindapur – Banskandi
Krishnapur
Neairgram Bagpur
Satkorakandi
Sibpur
Sonbarighat
West Singerbond
12 Sonai Baorikandi
Dakshin Mohanpur
Dakshin Saidpur
Didarkush
Kachudaram
Kaptanpur
Kazidahar
Nagdirgram Chandpur
Swadhin Bazar
124. In the process of such reorganization, Dolugram Gaon Panchayat which was
earlier within Sonai LAC/Banskandi Development Block/Banskandi Anchalik
Panchayat, has been included within Lakhipur LAC/Rongpur Development
Block/Rongpur Anchalik Panchayat. Palorbond Gaon Panchayat was earlier within
Sonai LAC/Banskandi Development Block/Banskandi Anchalik Panchayat.
Subsequently, Palorbond Gaon Panchayat has been included in Lakhipur
LAC/Lakhipur Development Block/Lakhipur Anchalik Panchayat. Similar changes
had occurred in respect of many villages within the Gaon Panchayats or areas of
the Gaon Panchayats. In some cases, the entire area of Gaon Panchayat was
taken out of the erstwhile Development Block/Anchalik Panchayat and in some
other cases, few villages from a Gaon Panchayat were taken out of the erstwhile
Page 157 of 195
Development Block/Anchalik Panchayat and have been included in the areas of
other Development Blocks/Anchalik Panchayats.
125. To carry out reorganization of Blocks, necessitated due to LAC delimitation
carried out by the ECI vide its Order dated 11.08.2023, it was deemed necessary
to delimit and reorganize the Gaon Panchayats under the respective Anchalik
Panchayats as the areas of many of the existing Gaon Panchayats with entire
villages or few of the villages, as a result of delimitation of LACs, had got divided
and fell in different Development Blocks and LAC areas. On comparison of the
areas brought within Banskandi Development Block and Banskandi Anchalik
Panchayat and similarly, the areas brought within Sonai Development Block and
Sonai Anchalik Panchayat, it is evident that the Gaon Panchayats which have
been brought under them are same for the Development Block as well as for the
co-extensive Anchalik Panchayat.
126. From the provisions of Section 31[1], it is clearly discernible that for each
Development Block, there shall be an Anchalik Panchayat having jurisdiction,
save as otherwise provided, over the entire Development Block jurisdiction
excluding such portions of the Block as are included in a Town Committee and
as are included in a Municipality or under the authority of a Municipal Corporation
or a Sanitary Board or a Cantonment Board or a notified area constituted under
any law for the time being in force. It is, thus, clear that any area within a
Development Block, which is part of a Town Committee or a Municipal
Corporation or a Sanitary Board or a Cantonment Board or a notified area
constituted under any law, is not to be included within the territorial jurisdiction
of a Anchalik Panchayat. After exclusion of such areas, the areas of a
Development Block is co-terminus with the areas of corresponding Anchalik
Panchayat. By the proviso to Section 31 [1], it has been provided that a Block
may comprise of such villages which are not contiguous or which have no
common boundaries and are separated by an area to which the Assam Panchayat
Act does not extend or by an area in which the remaining sections of the Assam
Page 158 of 195
Panchayat Act have not come into force. As per Section 32 [1][a] with the
nominal heading ‘Constitution of Anchalik Panchayat’, every Anchalik Panchayat
shall consist of one member from each Gaon Panchayat to be directly elected
from the territorial constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat under the jurisdiction
of the Anchalik Panchayat. An Anchalik Panchayat being co-terminus to a
Development Block shall have an Executive Officer appointed by the
Government, who shall be the ex-Officio Secretar, provided that the Block
Development Officer or such other officer as may be appointed by the
Government shall hold the post of Executive Officer and Secretary of the Anchalik
Panchayat [Section 62].
127. From a conjoint reading of Section 31 and Section 32 of the Assam Panchayat
Act, it would emerge that it is the State Government which requires to make the
declaration of the Anchalik Panchayats by issuance of a notification under sub-
section [1] of Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act. It has been further
provided that immediately after such declaration by the State Government, the
constituencies of the Anchalik Panchayats can be delimited as per sub-section
[1] of Section 32 of the Assam Panchayat Act. Section 31[1][a] of the Assam
Panchayat Act has prescribed that every Anchalik Panchayat shall inter-alia
consist of one member from each Gaon Panchayat to be directly elected from
the territorial constituencies of the Gaon Panchayat under the jurisdiction of the
Anchalik Panchayat. Thus, the power is inherent in Section 31 and Section 32
for the State Government to decide and declare about the Gaon Panchayats
included in the territorial jurisdiction of each of the Anchalik Panchayats.
128. The SOP, notified vide the Notification dated 03.08.2024, by taking into purview
the provision of Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act, had stipulated that the
Anchalik Panchayats are co-terminus with the Development Blocks and re-
organization of the Development Blocks would automatically delimit the Anchalik
Panchayats.
Page 159 of 195
129. The Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, of the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department, Government of Assam, which are the subject-matter of challenge
in this batch of writ petitions, are to be looked at in the context of such vital
developments, which developments were not brought to light by the parties at
the first instance. The Notifications were issued by the State Government
exercising powers conferred under sub-section [2] of Section 5 of the Assam
Panchayat Act notifying the Gaon Panchayats along with their corresponding
villages in each of the districts. The relevant Notification pertaining to Cachar
district was the Notification no. PDA.4/2024/GP/8 dated 15.10.2024. The
relevant excerpts from the said Notification pertaining to Cachar district and
Banskandi Anchalik Panchayat and Sonai Anchalik Panchayat are already
extracted hereinabove.
130. What has emerged from the Notifications issued for reorganization of the
Development Blocks; the Notifications issued under Section 65[1] and Section
31[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act; and the Order dated 11.08.2023 of the ECI
is that as a result of determining and delimiting the extent of each of the LACs,
there arose the necessity to revisit the territorial extents of the existing Gaon
Panchayats and the villages included within them prior to the process of
reorganization of the the Development Blocks, delimitation of the Anchalik
Panchayats and Zilla Parishads. As discussed above, by the ECI’s Order dated
11.08.2023, parts of some of the existing Gaon Panchayats with villages stood
excluded from its erstwhile Development Block/Anchalik Panchayat/LAC. In
some cases, the entire area of the Gaon Panchayat with all the villages stood
excluded from the area of the erstwhile Development Block/Anchalik
Panchayat/LAC. It is easily noticeable from the Order dated 11.08.2023 that the
ECI while deciding the extents of the LACs had included parts of a nos. of existing
Gaon Panchayats with some of the villages in more than one LACs and as a
result, the areas of those Gaon Panchayats/Anchalik Panchayats got divided into
two or more parts and therefore, the territorial extents were required to be
revisited and remedied for the purpose of Part-IX and the Assam Panchayat Act.
Page 160 of 195
The territorial extents of a nos. of erstwhile Development Blocks got divided into
more than LAC. Such inclusion of areas of the erstwhile Develipment Blocks,
which were co-extensive with the erstwhile Anchalik Panchayats, in more than
one LAC was not conducive for the impending Panchayat election. In order to
carry out the reorganization and delimitation process of the Anchalik Panchayats
and Zilla Parishads, concomitant changes in the extent of some of the Gaon
Panchayats were necessary. There arose the necessity to notify the Gaon
Panchayats and the corresponding villages which got included in the respective
Anchalik Panchayats in the process by operation of law. In such backdrop, the
stand of the State respondents that it has become imperative to carry out the
process of delimitation of Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon
Panchayats and reorganisation of Development Blocks in the State following the
delimitation of LACs of the State as per the ECI’s Order dated 11.08.2023 is
found justified.
131. As necessity arose for the State Government to reorganize the Development
Blocks and delimitation of the Zilla Parishads, Anchalik Panchayats and Gaon
Panchayats, the Notification dated 11.08.2023 of the ECIwas incorporated in
Clause 4[i] of the SOP as the basis for the clauses following it, as in ignorance
of it the process would run into rough weather.Therefore, Clause 4[ii] onwards
of the SOP are to be looked at qua the challenges mounted by the petitioners.
132. From Clause 7 of the SOP, it could be found that there were two proposals, [i]
delimitation of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats & Zilla Parishads; and [ii]
Block reorganization. It was mentioned in the SOP that the process would involve
collection of LAC-wise list of villages and respective Gaon Panchayat’s name, as
notified by the ECI in LAC delimitation and thereafter, assignment of the Gaon
Panchayat against each village. The LAC-wise Task Force was given the task to
execute the delimitation and reorganization process at the LAC level. The LAC-
wise Task Force was asked to collect the LAC-wise list of villages and respective
Gaon Panchayat’s name from the District Delimitation Commission, as notified
Page 161 of 195
by the ECI in LAC Delimitation. After collection of the villages list LAC-wise, a
Gaon Panchayat was to be assigned against each village. The Circle Officer
whose maximum area fell in the concerned LAC was the team leader in the LAC-
level Task Force. The BDO whose maximum area fell in the LAC and one official
who had good understanding of the Gaon Panchayat/Block boundaries were
made members of the LAC-level Task Force. By the Notification dated
03.08.2024 and by laying down the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP],
reorganization of the erstwhile Development Blocksin the State was also
envisaged. As per Section 31 of the Assam Panchayat Act, the areas of each of
the Anchalik Panchayats is to be co-terminus and same with a Development
Block.
133. Clause 4[ii] mentioned that there shall be no changes in the number of Gaon
Panchayats before the LAC delimitation and after the LAC delimitation in a district
and it would remain the same as that of the then existing number of Gaon
Panchayats in the district. In Clause 4 [ii] of the SOP, the State Government had
made its intention clear that there would not be, ordinarily, declaration of a Gaon
Panchayats under the amended Section 5[1] and the process would be
undertaken on the basis of the then existing Gaon Panchayats. In essence, the
extents of the existing Gaon Panchayats and the correspondeing villages would
be revisited for adjusting the villages, by way of inclusion or exclusion, into the
already established Gaon Panchayats., necessitated due to the afore-sated
reasons and situations.
134. It was further decided in Clause 4[iii] that one Gaon Panchayat shall belong to
only one LAC, meaning thereby, the territorial jurisdiction of a Gaon Panchayat
shall not be shared with more than one LAC. By Clause 4[iv] of the SOP, it was
laid down that if a Gaon Panchayat after LAC delimitation, was not shared among
more than one LAC, then preferably the Gaon Panchayat boundary would be
retained. It emerges from Clause 4[iii] that if a Gaon Panchayat after LAC
Page 162 of 195
delimitation was shared among more than one LAC, then changes would be
made in terms of Clause 4[v] and Clause 4[vi].
135. It was further proposed by Clause 4[vii] that a census village shall not be
bifurcated into two or more Gaon Panchayats. Meaning thereby, a census village
is to be a part of only one Gaon Panchayat area.
136. Clause 4[viii] made a provision that as per LAC delimitation, if a Gaon Panchayat
was divided between two districts, then that Gaon Panchayat would be
considered in the district having the Gaon Panchayat Head Quarter. No instance
of the kind, covered by the Clause 4[viii], has been brought to light in this batch
of writ petitions.
137. Clause 4[ii], Clause 4[iii], Clause 4[iv], Clause 4[vii] and Clause 4[viii] did not
speak about formation of any new Gaon Panchayat. No instance regarding
violation of these clauses of the SOP have been urged by the petitioners’ sides.
It is also pertinent to mention that these clauses were about Gaon Panchayats,
which were in existence on 03.08.2024.
138. In Clause 4[v], it was provided that if a Gaon Panchayat after LAC delimitation
had been shared among more than one LAC, then the villages under the
respective LACs either may be grouped together to form a new Gaon Panchayat
or the villages were to be accommodated in the nearby existing Gaon Panchayat,
subject to compliance of the criteria given in Clause 4[ii]. Clause 4[v] had
provided, as an option, for formation of a new Gaon Panchayat with villages if
the areas of a then existing Gaon Panchayat of which these villages were earlier
part, got included in more than one LAC, subject to compliance of the criteria
given in Clause 4[ii]. The other option provided in Clause 4[v] was that if a Gaon
Panchayat after LAC delimitation had been shared among more than one LAC,
then the villages were to be accommodated in the nearby existing Gaon
Panchayat, subject to compliance of the criteria given in Clause 4[ii]. Clause 4[vi]
Page 163 of 195
was a follow up provision for the first option in Clause 4[v]. It provided for
formation of a new Gaon Panchayat by taking into consideration the factors like
the population, natural boundary and category of the district, as per amended
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act. Renaming of an existing Gaon
Panchayat after accommodating the villages as per the second option would not
amount to formation of a new Gaon Panchayat. Other than formation of a new
Gaon Panchayat in the afore-stated exigency mentioned in Clause 4[v] of the
SOP, the clauses in the SOP mentioned about Gaon Panchayats, which were in
existence as on the date of the SOP.
139. From the above, it is evidently clear that as a result of delimitation of the LACs
in Assam vide the ECI’s Order dated 11.08.2023, which has the force of law, the
extent of LAC stood divided and changed in terms of Table-A therein for the
purpose of election to the Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly. It did not,
however, result in any changes in the territorial limits of the districts in Assam.
It can be iterated that the Order dated 11.08.2023 had delimited the LACs and
while delimiting the LACs, it mentioned the extents of the the Development
Blocks and the Gaon Panchayats as well, which were made part of each of the
LACs. As a result of delimitation of the LACs, the Order dated 11.08.2023
included a part of one Development Block in one LAC and part[s] of the said
Development Block in other LAC[s]. Similarly, the Order dated 11.08.2023
included a part of a nos. of Gaon Panchayats in one LAC and part[s] of the same
Gaon Panchayats in some other LAC[s]. In view of the ECI’s Order dated
11.08.2023, the State Government started the delimitation process of the Zilla
Parishads and the reorganization of Development Blocks together with
delimitation of Anchalik Panchayats and the Gaon Panchayats together. The
power and authority to do so is available in the provisions of Section 5, Section
6, Section 31, Section 32, Section 64 and Section 65 of the Assam Panchayat
Act.
Page 164 of 195
140. The unamended Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act provided that the State
Government can declare ‘any local area’ comprising of a revenue village or a
group of revenue villages or a Forest village or a tea garden area or hamlets
forming part of revenue village or Forest village or tea garden area or other such
administrative unit or part thereof to be ‘a Gaon Panchayat’ with population of
its territory not less six thousand and not more than ten thousand. Hamlet
usually means a small settlement or a small populated area. The amended
Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act has provided that the State
Government can declare ‘any local area’ comprising of a revenue village of a
group of revenue villages or a Forest village or a tea garden area or hamlets
forming part of revenue village or Forest village or tea garden area or other such
administrative unit or part thereof to be ‘a Gaon Panchayat’ with population of
its territory as per the category within which the district falls. On a comparative
analysis of unamended Section 5[1] and amended Section 5[1] what is borne
out is that the State Government can declare ‘any local area’ comprising of a
revenue village of a group of revenue villages or a Forest village or a tea garden
area or hamlets forming part of of revenue village or Forest village or tea garden
area or other such administrative unit of part thereof to be ‘a Gaon Panchayat’.
The only difference in the two sections lies in the part relating to the population
range within the territory of the Gaon Panchayat. The Assam Panchayat Act has
not provided for the definition of ‘local area’.
141. As per the definition provided by Section 2[9] of the Assam Panchayat Act,
‘village’ means ‘any local area’, recorded as a village in the revenue record of the
District in which it is situated and includes any areas which the State Government
may, by general order or special order, declare to be a village for the purpose of
the Assam Panchayat Act. Article 243[g] of the Constitution has defined ‘village’
to mean a village specified by the Governor by public notification to be village
for the purposes of Part-IX and includes a group of villages so specified.
‘Panchayat area’, as defined by Article 243[e], means the territorial area of a
Panchayat. In respect of a Gaon Panchayat, which is the Panchayat at the village
Page 165 of 195
level, the ‘Panchayat area’ of a Gaon Panchayat is the territorial area of the Gaon
Panchayat.
142. In Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti [supra], the Hon’ble Supreme Court on
Article 243 [g] has observed that any existing village or a group of villages may
be specified by the Governor as a village for the purposes of organizing a village
panchayat. There is nothing wrong if the Governor specifies the revenue village
as villages and in addition also those villages and settlements which are not so
recorded in the revenue records as villages for the purpose of constituting village
panchayats. No restriction has been placed by Article 243 [g] on the Governor
for accepting the revenue village as a village for the purpose of constituting
village panchayats. In fact, the Governor has been empowered by the said
constitutional provision to declare even a group of villages as a village.
143. After the Assam Panchayat Act was enacted the Gaon Panchayats were
established under the provisions of unamended Section 5[1] by declaration of
local areas with defined limits as Gaon Panchayats. At the time amended Section
5[1] came to be inserted the Gaon Panchayats were already established and in
existence. Those Gaon Panchayats were deemed to be established taking into
consideration the population range mentioned in unamended Section 5 [1].
144. Section 5[2][a] has provided that the Government may, by similar notification,
at any time, include within or exclude from any village, any local area or
otherwise, from the limit of any village, after consultation with the Gaon
Panchayat, if it has already been established. Section 5[2][b] has provided that
the Government may, by similar notification, at any time, declare that any local
area shall cease to a village and thereupon the local area shall be so excluded
from the limit of the village so altered, after consultation with the Gaon
Panchayat, if it has already been established. From Chapter-IV, ‘Establishment
and Constitution of Gaon Panchayat’, it is beyond any scintilla of doubt that such
Page 166 of 195
inclusion or exclusion of any village or local area is meant to be in or from a Gaon
Panchayat area already established.
145. The applicability of Section 5[2] is clearly in a situation where a Gaon Panchayat
has already been established. The use of the word, ‘any local area’ is also found
mentioned in Section 5[2], like Section 5[1]. It has been manifested from both
pre-amended Section 5[1] and amended Section 5 [1] that a ‘local area’ can
comprise of [i] a revenue village, or [ii] a group of revenue villages, or [iii] a
Forest village or [iv] a tea garden area, or [v] hamlets forming part of revenue
village, or [vi] hamlets forming part of Forest village or [vii] hamlets forming part
of tea garden area or [vii] other such administrative unit, or [viii] part of such
administrative unit. From the definition and interpretation of ‘village’ from Article
243[g] and Section 2[9], the State Government is empowered to specify the
revenue village as villages and in addition also those villages and settlements
which are not so recorded in the revenue records as villages for the purpose of
constituting village panchayats. No restriction has been placed by Article 243[g]
on the Governor for accepting the revenue village as a village for the purpose of
constituting village panchayats.
146. The elasticity in the provisions defining ‘local area’ and ‘village’ in the Constitution
and the Assam Panchayat Act, in the considered view of the court, had permitted
the State Government to issue the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, under
Section 5[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act to exclude any village or any local area
from an already established Gaon Panchayat and include any village or any local
area in an already established Gaon Panchayat to facilitate the demilitation
process of the Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in the
State as well as for reorganization of the Development Blocks. One of the main
objects behind the process was to delimit and readjust the territorial extents of
the Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in conformity with
the delimitation of the LACs. The elected bodies of the Gaon Panchayats stood
dissolved much earlier to initiation of the process of delimitation of Panchayats
Page 167 of 195
and recorganisation of Development Blocks because of expiry of their five-year
tenure under Article 243E. Section 5[2] has envisaged for a consultation with
the Gaon Panchayat, if it has already been established, prior to issuance of a
notification under it by the State Government. The word, consultation has to be
intetrpreted qua the object and purpose for which the provision for consultation
is made. As the power and authority to declare, constitute and notify a Gaon
Panchayat stand vested with the State Government, the State Government has
the primacy over the matter. If there is no elected body of the Gaon Panchayat,
then consultation with such body is not possible and in such an eventuality,
consultation is also not required. In such situation, the State Government, in the
Notification dated 03.08.2024, had inducted an official who had good
understanding of the Gaon Panchayat/Block boundaries as a member of the LAC-
level Task Force to render assistance to the State Government in the decision-
making process. The process so adopted cannot be termed as one in derogation
of the provision of the Assam Panchayat Act.
147. From the discussion made above, it is found that there are statutory provisions
in the Assam Panchayat Act which provide for delimitation of Gaon Panchayats,
Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads. In the process of delimitation of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads, attributablealso due to
delimitation of LACs having the force of law, the process also resulted into
inclusion and exclusion of Gaon Panchayats, either fully or partly, with all the
villages or with few of the villages, within one Anchalik Panchayat/ Development
Block or the other. It is also not inconsivable to maintain the same ratio, so far
as practicable as envisaged in Article 243C, without categoraising the districts
on the basis of population density. In the facts and circumstances of the case in
hand, the provisions contained in amended Section 5[1] cannot be construed as
an imperative obligation. For the afore-stated reasons, no infirmity is found in
issuance of the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, which calls for any interference
on the ground of want of power and authority on the part of the State
Government. As a corollary, the grounds on which challenge has been made to
Page 168 of 195
the actions taken through the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, to notify the Gaon
panchayats along with their correspondending villages in each of the districts
are found lacking credence.
XXIII. The role of District Delimitation Commission :-
148. By the Notification dated 03.08.2024, the State Government had constituted
District Delimitation Commission with the members, as mentioned in Clause 3
thereof. The three-member District Delimitation Commission had been
constituted with [i] the jurisdictional District Commissioner as the Chairman; [ii]
the Chief Executive Officer of the jurisdictional Zilla Parishad as the Member
Secretary; and [iii] the Election Officer[s] as the third member. The constitution
of the District Delimitation Commissions is found to be in conformity with the
provision of Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act. This Court is not persuaded
to accept the submission advanced by the petitioners’ sides that the District
Delimitation Commission in each district had to be constituted by naming the
individuals, who would constitute the Commission. As the State Government had
constituted the District Delimitation Commissions in each district with the
incumbents of the offices on ex-officio basis, it cannot be said that there had
been infraction of the provisions of Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act, as
amended. Rather, the constitution of the Commissions with the officials on ex-
officio basis had facilitated smooth continuance and completion of the
delimitation and reorganization process.
149. On perusal of the provision of Section 3A of the Assam Panchayat Act, as
amended, it is noticeable that the District Delimitation Commissions are
entrustedto decide the size of the Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and
Zilla Parishad Constituencies. In the statute, power has not been given to the
District Delimitation Commission specifically to issue a notification under Section
2[6] of the Assam Panchayat Act. By the Notification dated 03.08.2024 and the
SOP, the District Delimitation Commissions was given the task to form the LAC-
Page 169 of 195
level Task Forces from the respective LAC of the district. The LAC-level Task
Force was to execute the delimitation and reorganization process at the LAC
level. The LAC-level Task Forces were asked to to collect the LAC-wise lists of
villages and the respective Gaon Panchayats from the District Delimtation
Commission, as notified by the ECI in LAC Delimitation. The District Delimitation
Commission was reporting authority for the LAC-level Task Forces. The public
hearings were to be conducted under the aegis of the District Delimitation
Commission. As the public hearings were conducted by LAC-wise Task Forces
chaired by jurisdictional District Commissioners nominated by the Distict
Delimitation Commission the point urged on behalf of the petitioners that the
claims and objections were not heard by the District Limitation Commission does
not deserve acceptance. After completion of the public hearings, relevant records
and proposals were submitted by the District Delimitation Commission before
the State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development Department
through the Commissioner, Panchayat & Rural Development, Assam. The final
decision on the relevant records and proposals rested on the State Government.
It was after decision of the State Cabinet, the Notifications deciding about the
extents/areas of the Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads were published and
notified by the State Government. As with the process of redifining the
extents/areas of Anchalik Panchayats/ Development Blocks, the process of the
inclusion or exclusion of Gaon Panchayats as constituencies of the Anchalik
Panchayats were intricately involved, the State Government in order to facilitate
the same had decided on the extents/areas of the already existing Gaon
Panchayats by including or excluding local areas or villages under Section 5[2]
and also delimited the Anchalike Panchayats under Section 31 and Section 32,
as deemed necessary and expedient.
150. As per sub-section [2] of Section 6 of the Assam Panchayat Act, the prescribed
authority shall, for the convenience of election, in accordance with such rules as
may be prescribed in that behalf by the Government, divide the area of the Gaon
Panchayat into ten territorial constituencies and allot one seat for each
Page 170 of 195
constituency. Rule 6 of the then extant 1995 Rules has inter-alia provided that
the Deputy Commissioner or the Sub-Divisional Officer, as the case may be, shall
immediately after declaration of a Gaon Panchayat under unamended sub-
section [1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act, delimit the number of
constituencies as per sub-section [2] of Section 6 of the Assam Panchayat
Act.There was no bar in Clause 4[vii] for dividing a census village into two or
more Gaon Panchayat Constituencies [Wards]. It was provided in Clause 4[ix]
of the SOP that after delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats, the delimitation of
Gaon Panchayat Constituencies [i.e. ten nos. of wards] within the Gaon
Panchayats shall be done as per Section 6[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act,
without specifically mentioning about the prescribed authority. By Section 2 of
the Assam Panchayat [Amendment] Act, 2023, sub-section [46]in Section 2
hasbeen inserted providing for the definition of ‘ward’. As per Section 2[46],
‘ward’ means any territorial constituency recorded as a ward in the revenue
record of the ‘Gaon Panchayat’ in which it is situated and includes any areas
which the State Government may be general or special order, declare to be a
‘ward’ for the purpose of the Assam Panchayat Act.
151. It has been brought to notice that after issuance of the Notifications dated
15.10.2024 by the State Government in the Panchayat & Rural Development
Department for delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats in the afore-stated manner,
the District Commissioner of the respective district as the Chairman, District
Delimitation Commission, had brought out notifications in exercise of powers
under sub-section [2] of Section 6 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 delimiting
the constituencies [wards] of the respective Gaon Panchayats, as mentioned in
Clause 4[ix] of the SOP. With no corresponding changes brought in Rule 6 of the
1995 Rules with regard to the prescribed authority and the State Government
being empowered declare to be a ‘ward’ for the purpose of the Assam Panchayat
Act by a general or special order under Section 2[46], the State Government is
denuded of its power to delegate the function of declaring the wards of the Gaon
Page 171 of 195
Panchayats to the the Chairman of the jurisdictional District Delimitation
Commission-cum-District Commissioner.
152. From the above discussion, this Court has reached a view that it is within the
domain of the State Government to issue notifications like the Notifications dated
15.10.2024 under Section 5[2] combined with the power, authority and
jurisdiction vested by the other provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act.
153. The petitioners in this batch of writ petition have not cited any instance of
formation of a new Gaon Panchayat, as indicated in Clause 4[v] of the SOP.
From the synopses of the pleadings of the writ petitions, as limned in paragraph
4 to paragraphs 13 above, it is found that the petitioners have essentially
contended on the inclusion of village[s] from one Gaon Panchayat area in other
Gaon Panchayat area[s]. The legality and validity of such an exercise has already
been addressed hereinabove. There was, thus, no occasion for operationalise
Clause 4[x] in absence of any occasion for formation of a new Gaon Panchayat
exercising the option under Clause 4[v] read with Clause 4[vi] of the SOP.
Therefore, this court is of the considered view that the submissions advanced by
the petitioners on this front cannot be carried forward in their favour. When
there is no necessity for declaration about formation of new Gaon Panchayats,
as engisaged by amended Section 5[i] of the Assam Panchayat Act, the power
under Section 5[2] of the Assam Panchayat Act is exercisable for readjustment
of the existing Gaon Panchayat areas.
XXIV. Right to vote; Right to contest; General inconvenience, injustice, etc.
arising from non-compliance of amended Section 5[1] :-
154. It is, therefore, necessary to find out about the rights of the petitioners
associated with the delimitation of Panchayats and election to the Panchayats
and other related issues and whether any of such rights have been infringed
and/or the petitioners have suffered any serious inconvenience, hardship, etc.
Page 172 of 195
155. Two rights – the right to vote and the right to contest – of the citizens-electors
are foundassociated with the election to the Panchayati Raj Institutions and the
process of delimitation is a precursor to an election. The first right of the citizens
is the right to vote in a Panchayat election to elect the representatives to the
Panchayats at the three levels and the other right is the right to contest to get
elected as a representative to the Panchayats at the three levels. Part-IX of the
Constitution does not contain any provision about the stipulations to be a voter
at elections to the Panchayats. There is no provision in Part-IX of the Constitution
laying down the qualifications required for a citizen to be a candidate for election
to the Panchayats. All Indian adult citizens have the right to vote irrespective of
their caste, creed, race, gender, ethnicity, etc. on the principle of universal adult
franchise. Article 243F has, however, mentioned about disqualifications for
membership. The legislature of the concerned State may, by law, provide for the
disqualifications for membership. There are provisions in the Assam Panchayat
Act for disqualification of membership to the Panchayats.
156. When the two rights of the citizens – the right to vote and the right to contest –
came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Javed
vs. State of Haryana, [2003] 8 SCC 369, it has been held by a three-Judge
Bench that the right to contest an election is neither a fundamental right nor a
common law right. It is a right conferred by a statute and at the most, in view
of Part-IX of the Constitution, a right to contest election for an office in
Panchayat may be said to be a Constitutional right – a right originating in the
Constitution and given shape by statute. But even so, it cannot be equated with
a fundamental right. A subsequent two-Judge Bench in Rajbala and others vs.
State of Haryana and others, [2016] 2 SCC 445, following Javed [supra], has
held that the right to vote at and the right to contest an election to a Panchayat
are constitutional rights subsequent to introduction of Part-IX in the Constitution
and both the rights can be regulated or curtailed by the appropriate legislature.
Page 173 of 195
157. Rule 13 of the Rules, 1995 has inter-alia stipulated that no person shall, in case
of election of member of Gaon Panchayat, member of Anchalik Panchayat and
member of Zilla Parishad from the Gaon panchayat area and from the Zilla
Parishad area, exercise his right to vote except in the particular constituency of
the Gaon Panchayat and the district, in the electoral roll of which his name has
been entered. No person shall exercise his right to vote in more than one Gaon
Panchayat or Zilla Parishad constituency. As per Rules 14, every voter of Gaon
Panchayat constituency is entitled to have and cast one vote for electing a
member of the Gaon Panchayat, one member of Anchalik Panchayat and one
member of Zilla Parishad. Every voter of a Zilla Parishad Constituency is entitled
to have and cast one vote for electing a member of the Zilla Parishad. Under
Rulee 22, any person whose name appears in the list of voters of any of the
constituencies of a Gaon Panchayat or Zilla Parishad and who is not disqualified
under the prescribed rules can be nominated as a candidate from the concerning
Gaon panchayat or Zilla Parishad Constituency for election as a member of the
Gaon Panchayat and a member of Anchalik Panchayat and for election as
member of the Zilla Parishad Constituency in whose jurisdiction the Gaon
Panchayat, Anchalik Panchayat or the Zilla Parishad, as the case may be, falls.
158. The demiltation process initiated by and completed after the the Notification
dated 03.08.2024 has not impinged upon any of the said two rights of the
petitioners.
159. From the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners in this batch of writ
petitions, it seems to have emerged that in view of delimitation of territorial
constituencies of the Panchayats, especially at the Gaon Panchayat level, the
petitioners’ would face inconvenience to exercise the right to vote at the ensuing
Panchayat election. Some of the petitioners have contended that their village[s]
is/are situated at a greater distance from the polling station[s] than the previous
Panchayat election. For another set of petitioners, the grievances are to the
effect that the office[s] of the Gaon Panchayat[s] is/are situated at a far distance
Page 174 of 195
now than earlier and the mode of communication or the geographical terrain
between their respective village[s] and the Gaon Panchayat office[s] is not
convenient and conducive for their effective participation. Such factors cannotbe
held to have wiped out either of the two rights – the right to vote at the
Panchayat election and the right to contest election to an office in Panchayat at
any of the three levels. It has been the stand of the State respondents that the
delimitation process was carried out by maintaining contiguity considering the
population density, geographical accessibility, administrative convenience,
communication and public convenience, contiguity of the areas and other
relevant factors so as not to affect the objects of rural self-governance envisaged
in Part-IX of the Constitution.
160. In the process followed after the Notification dated 03.08.2024, the SOP and the
Addendun Notification dated 05.09.2024, the dates were fixed for filing of
representations/suggestions/objections by electors, civil society organizations
and recognized political parties. The dates of public hearings were notified and
on those dates, public hearings were held. The representations/suggestions/
objections were considered and disposed of by passing orders on them. The
process followed during the delimitation process can be found out from the
narration made in the previous part of this order and the same are not repeated
herein, for the sake of brevity.
161. It has been observed in Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samity [supra] to the effect
that it is obligatory on the part of the State Government to hear objections before
finalization of the Panchayat areas on the presmises that change in the areas
would result in civil consequences. Holding that an action of bringing more
villages than one under village panchayat when they were earlier under separate
village panchayats involves civil consequences,it has been observed that such a
contemplated action calls for grant of reasonable opportunity for raising
objections and of hearing to the citizens-electors. Such a procedure is required
to be followed with a view to remove the grievances, if any, with regard to the
Page 175 of 195
difficulties, inconveniences and hardships, likely neglect of the electors’ interests,
remoroteness of the seat of administration, domination of certain sections and
forces, want of proper transport and communication facilities, etc. The
opportunity will also provide an occasion for the people to come forward with
suggestions for better and more viable, compact and cohesive regrouping of the
villages for efficient administration and economic development. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court has further held that the objections are not to be invited to
enable the people to exercise some sort of a right of self-determination. The
final decision with regard to the delimitation of the Panchayat areas, after
hearing the objections and suggestions, will be that of the State Government.
162. The decision in Assn. of Residents of Mhow [ROM] vs. Delimitation
Commission of India, [2009] 5 SCC 404pertained to readjustment of
Parliamentary and Legislative Assembly Constituenicies in the State of Madhya
Prdesh by the Delimitation Commission as per the provisions of the Delimitation
Act, 2002. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed therein that determining
the delimitation of Parliamentary and Legislative Assembly Constituencies is a
very complex and lengthy process. In the matter of considering the objections
and suggestions, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed in the following
manner :-
25. It is true, determination of the delimitation of parliamentary constituencies
and assembly constituencies, as the case may be, shall be only after
consideration of all the objections and suggestions which may have been
received by the Commission before the specified date for which purposes the
Commission may hold one or more public sittings at such place or places in
each State as it thinks fit. The Commission is not required to hold public
meeting in each and every parliamentary constituency. What the Commission
required is to consider the objections and suggestions for its proposals before
determining the delimitation of the constituencies in the entire State.
Page 176 of 195
26. The proposals cannot emanate from any interested person. The
distinction between the Commission’s proposals and the objections and
suggestions in response to such proposals is to be borne in mind. Every
suggestion or objection cannot ultimately result in any fresh proposal by the
Commission. The Commission is not under any legal or constitutional
obligation to go on issuing any revised proposals depending upon every
objection and suggestion as may be received by it in response to its
proposals. Since the exercise of the delimitation is not with reference to any
particular constituency, the suggestions or objections, as the case may be, in
respect of one constituency may have their impact at least on one or more of
the adjoining constituencies.
163. One cannot be oblivious of the situation that determining the delimitation of
panchayats at all the three levels and readjustment is a complex and arduous
process involving various stages including receipt of representations/
suggestions/objections and their consideration after holding public hearings.
Taking a cue from the above observations and the process undertaken
subsequent to the Notification dated 03.08.2024, it cannot be said in the case
in hand that the State respondents did not provide opportunity of filing
representations/suggestions/objections. The State respondents had held public
hearings and considered the representations/suggestions/objections and passed
orders on them. In the process of delimitation of Panchayats for any of the three
levels, right of self-determination has not been vested on the citizens-electors
either by the Constitution or by the Assam Panchayat Act. The State authorities
are also required to consider the effect and impact of implementing one
proposal/suggestion recived in respect of one constituency of one Gaon
Panchayat or Anchalik Panchayat or Zilla Parishad on other or adjoining
constituencies of Gaon Panchayat or Anchalik Panchayat or Zilla Parishad. It is
after such consideration, the State authorities are to take decisions in the matter
Page 177 of 195
of delimitation of the Panchayats and their constituencies. The final decision
taken by the State Government in the matter of delimitation of Panchayats
through the Notifications under reference cannot, thus, be faultedon such count
and this Court does not, therefore, find any ground to interdict with those
Notifications on that count.
XXV. Article 243C of Part-IX of the Constitution:-
164. As a result, the only legal issue which is left for consideration is whether there
has been a breach of the constitutional provision in following the process of the
delimitation, as discussed, and in not following the procedure outlined in
amended sub-section [1] of Section 5 of the Assam Panchayat Act.
165. What is contained in Article 243C is already referred to in a previous paragraph.
It speaks about two ratios : firstly, the ratio between the population of the
territorial area of a Panchayat at any level of the three levels and the number of
seats in each of such Panchayats to be filled by election; and secondly, the ratio
between the population of each Constituency in each Panchayat area and the
number of seats allotted to it. In both the cases, the ratio should be the same,
so far as practicable.
166. The meaning ascribed to the word, ‘practicable’, adj. [of a thing] in Black’s Law
Disctionary, Seventh Edition is reasonably capable of being accomplished;
feasible. As per the Chambers 21st Century Disctionary, ‘practicable’ means
capable of being done or used or successfully carried out; feasible. The use of
the phrase ‘so far as’ before the word ‘practicable’ goes to indicate that the ratio
indicated is required to be achieved to the extent feasible or possible to achieve.
It indicates to a situation of maintaining the same ratio is a desirable one but
only if it is feasible or possible to be achieved. The feasibility of achieving it is
dependent upon various constraints, limitations and other relevant factors, which
cannot be exhaustively enumerated. Thus, the use of the exression, ‘so far as
Page 178 of 195
practicable’ as regards the ratio in Article 243C requires endeavours on the part
of the State to achieve it but if it is not feasible and impracticable for the State
then the discretion is available to the State to achieve it to the extent
administratively feasible and practicable.
167. In most of the writ petitions, the petitioners have conspicuously, not brought
any challenge to the Notifications published in the Official Gazette delimiting the
Zilla Parishads and Anchalik Panchayats along with their corresponding Gaon
Panchayats. Effectively, there is no challenge on the breach of the principle
mentioned in the proviso to Clause [1] of Article 243C of the Constitution. An
issue not raised in a writ petition is not to be adjudicated.It is, therefore, not
necessary to discuss further on the aspect of the ratio embedded in the proviso
to Clause [1] of Article 243C of the Constitution.
168. Submissions have been advanced with regard to the first proviso to Clause [1]
of Article 243C and Clause [2] of Article 243C to canvass that the Standard
Operating Procedure [SOP] laid down in the Notification dated 03.08.2024 and
the Notifications, dated 15.10.2024, issued by the Panchayat and Rural
Development Department notifying the Gaon Panchayats along with their
corresponding villages in each of the districts are not in harmony with the
constitutional principle of maintaining the same ratio, so far as practicable,
throughout the Panchayat area.
169. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that such a point of law is to be backed
by facts and data. The pleadings in this batch of writ petitions are not premised
on the aspect of violation of the constitutional principle about maintaining the
same ratio, so far as practicable, throughout the Panchayat area in terms of
Clause [2] of Article 243C of the Constitution. The basis of determining the areas
of the Panchayats is the 2001 Census. Therefore, the point of law regarding the
obligation to maintain the same ratio, so far as practicable, throughout the
Panchayat area ought to have been made on the basis of the identified data
Page 179 of 195
from the 2001 Census. After perusal of the pleadings, this Court is of the
considered view that the submissions made during the hearing regarding the
constitutional principle embodied in Clause [2] of Article 243C are not backed by
any factual foundation, much less solid factual foundation. There cannot be any
superstructure in the absence of a solid foundation. By the same analogy,
submissions made on a law point losses much of its force if there is no factual
foundation laid in the pleadings of the writ petition to buttress such law points,
however strong it may be. There is another vital aspect, which is associated with
it and which is harped on by the learned Advocate General during his
submissions. Had the required facts been pleaded and the specific data been
placed for raising a law point like the ones agitated on the basis of Article 243C
then the respondents would have got the opportunity to traverse such facts in
their counter affidavits by placing the specific facts/data from their standpoints.
170. Section 65[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act appears to have contained the
mechanism to determine the territorial constituencies geared towards meeting
the constitutional principle mentioned Clause [2] in Article 243C of the
Constitution. The ECI’s Order dated 11.08.2023 also mentioned about the same.
In the considered view of this Court, the reason behind the provision for
maintaining the ratio, so far as practicable, is for providing fair and equitable
representation to an elector in the democratic process of election to the
Panchayats irrespective of the constituency to which the elector belongs. Its
purpose is to give equal significance to each elector’s vote. The unamended
Section 5[1] provided for declaration of Gaon Panchayats with population in their
territories not less than six thousand and not more than ten thousand and it can
be presumed that the existing Gaon Panchayats, as on 03.08.2024, had fullfiled
the criterion on population range. There is no utterance from the petitioners that
the population range of not less than six thousand and not more than ten
thousand had the propensity to breach the constitutional principle embedded in
Clause [2] of Article 243C as regards maintaining the same ratio, so far as
practicable. The amended Section 5[1] has provided for a population range of
Page 180 of 195
six thousand to thirteen thousand eight hundred, divided into three sub-
categorieson the basis of districts, for maintaining the same ratio, so far as
practicable. It is also the stand of the State respondents that the delimitation
exercise was done keeping in view the population density as per village
population census and as per geographical accessibility, contiguity and
administrative convenience, after adequate public consultations. The petitioners
have not been able to show any statutory provision casting obligation to publish
the ratio.
171. In this connection, it appears relevant to refer to the following observations made
by the Hon’ble Supreme in State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Pradhan Sangh
Kshettra Samiti, 1995 Supp [2] SCC 305, :-
43. …… Article 243[e] defines ‘panchayat area’ to mean ‘territorial area of a
panchayat’ and Article 243-C speaks about the composition of panchayats and
leaves it to the legislature of a State to make provisions with respect to it. The
only conditions that the latter article imposes on the composition of panchayat
are firstly, the ratio between the population of the territorial area of the
panchayat at any level and the number of seats in the panchayat to be filled
by election shall, as far as practicable, be the same throughout the State.
Secondly, the seats in the panchayat have to be filled by direct election from
the territorial constituencies in a panchayat area and for this purpose the
panchayat area has to be divided into territorial constituencies in such a
manner that the ratio between the population of each constituency and the
number of seats allotted to it have as far as practicable to be the same
throughout the panchayat area. So long as these conditions are complied with,
the composition of the panchayat that may be evolved by the State legislature
cannot be faulted. We do not see any material before us to suggest that these
two criteria are breached or are sought to be breached……
Page 181 of 195
44. It is for the Government to decide in what manner the panchayat areas
and the constituencies in each panchayat area will be delimited. It is not for
the court to dictate the manner in which the same would be done. So long as
the panchayat areas and the constituencies are delimited in conformity with
the constitutional provisions or without committing a breach thereof, the courts
cannot interfere with the same……
172. There is always a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed
and the common course of business has been followed in particular cases. The
presumptions are rebuttable. The responsibility to rebut is on the person who
claims otherwise. In absence of any materials presented by the petitioners for
rebuttal, it is not for the Court to embark on any roving enquiry to find out the
ratio to be maintainedqua Clause [2] of Article 243C of the Constitution, which
is only to be maintained as far as practicable. Therefore, on the allegation of
breach of the constitutional principle embedded in Clause [2] of Article 243C of
the Constitution, this Court is not in position to hold that the petitioners have
been able to place sufficient materials to decide on the issue and in view of non-
success on that front, the challenge is bound to fail. Therefore, it is accordingly
observed.
XXVI. Maintainability or non-maitainability of Writ Petitions on the ground of
Locus :-
173. In so far as the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 48/2025 is concerned, an objection has
been raised on the point of maintainability of the writ petition. The writ petition,
W.P.[C] no. 48/2025 is filed by one ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’. The
issue of maintainability has been raised on the premise that the petitioner,
‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ is only an unregistered association of
persons and not a registered association of persons. In such scenario, the
association, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ cannot have the locus standi
Page 182 of 195
to file the writ petition as it cannot allege violation of any fundamental right.
Similarly, the writ petitions – W.P.[C] no. 5771/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024 –
are also filed by unregistered associations.
174. On perusal of the Order dated 10.01.2025, which was passed at a previous stage
of the present proceedings after hearing the learned counsel for the parties on
the prayer for interim relief, it is noticed that the issue of maintainability of the
writ petition on the point of locus standi of the petitioner, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar
Suraksha Mancho’ was raised on behalf of the State respondents and it was
responded to on behalf of the writ petitioner.
175. The principle of res judicata is engrafted in Section 11 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 and it bars the Court from deciding issues which have been
directly or indirectly in issue in an earlier proceeding between the same parties
or parties claiming under the same title and have been finally decided. It is well
established that the principle of res judicata, which Section 11 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 embodies, is also applicable to writ petitions under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. It is held in Satyadhyan Ghosal and others vs.
Deorjin Debi [Smt.] and another, reported in AIR 1960 SC 941, that the
principle of res judicata applies also as between two stages in the same litigation
to the extent that a Court, whether the trial court or a higher court having at a
earlier stage decided a matter in one way will not allow the parties to re-agitate
the matter again at a subsequent stage of the same proceedings. Reiterating the
same principle, it is held in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. State
of Uttar Pradesh and another, reported in [2005] 1 SCC 444, that the principle
of res judicata is based on the need of giving a finality to judicial decisions. The
principle which prevents the same case being litigated is of general application
and is not limited by the specific words of Section 11 of the Code of Civil
Procedure in this respect.
Page 183 of 195
176. In view of the above exposition on the principle of res judicata, made applicable
also to the writ petitions, the Order dated 10.01.2025 passed at an earlier stage
of the present proceedings is examined to find out whether the Court had
rendered any opinion on the issue of maintainability raised during the course of
previous hearing, which culminated into the Order dated 10.01.2025. On such
examination, it is found that no opinion had been recorded by the Court in the
Order dated 10.01.2025 on the issue of maintainability, addressed by the learned
counsel for the parties. The Order dated 10.01.2025 was not assailed by the writ
petitioner, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ by way of any intra-court
appeal. Thus, the issue of maintainability of the writ petition qua the locus standi
of the writ petitioner is open for examination by this Court as the principle of res
judicata is not applicable. The contention raised on behalf of the State
respondents that the writ petitioner, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ is not
a registered association, but an unregistered association, is not rebutted since
then with the support of any documentary evidence with regard to registration
of the association under any statute.
177. The fact that an association is a registered one can be best demonstrated by its
registration certificate issued under the concerned statute. To buttress the issue
of maintainability on the ground of locus, reliance has been placed in the
decisions of this Court in Narsingarh Mini Bus Owner’s Syndicate and another
vs. State of Tripura, 1998 [4] GLT 162; All Manipur DIC Supervisors’
Association vs. State of Manipur and others, [2000] 1 GLR355; Rangapara
Development Circle vs. State of Assam and others, 2007 [3] GLR 805; State
of Manipur and others vs. State Land Use Board Casual Employees’
Association and another, [2007] 2 GLR 56; and Meghalaya Wine Dealers
Association and another vs. State of Meghalaya and others, 2010 [2] GLT
673. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a
three-Judge decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court titled Umesh Chand
Vinod Kumar and others vs. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Bharthana and
another, AIR 1984 All 46; and the seven-Judge Bench decision of the Hon’ble
Page 184 of 195
Supreme Court of India in S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India and another, 1981
[Supp] SCC 87.
178. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in S.P. Gupta [supra] has accepted poverty,
helplessness and disability or social or economic disadvantaged position as a
sufficient ground for maintaining a writ petition. It has inter-aliaobserved that if
the State or any public authority acts beyond the scope of its power and thereby
causes a specific legal injury to a person or to a determinate class or group of
persons, it would be a case of private injury and it would give rise to a
corresponding right in such person or determinate class or group of persons and
they would be entitled to maintain an action for judicial redress. But if no specific
legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate class or group of persons
by the act or omission of the State or any public authority which is contrary to
the Constitution or the law and the injury is caused only to public interest, any
member of the public acting bona fide and having sufficient interest can maintain
an action for redressal of such public wrong or public injury. In such a situation,
the strict rule of locus standi is relaxed and any member of the public who is not
a mere busybody or a meddlesome interloper can maintain an action for judicial
redress.
179. The Full-Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Umesh Chand Vinod Kumar
[supra] has answered the question whether an association of persons, registered
or unregistered, can maintain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
for enforcement of the rights of its members as distinguished from the
enforcement of its own rights. The question has been answered by stating that
the position appears to be that an association of persons, registered or
unregistered, can file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for
enforcement of the rights of its members as distinguished from the enforcement
of its own rights in case members of such an association are themselves unable
to approach the Court by reason of poverty, disability or socio-economically
disadvantaged positions [‘Little Indians’]. In other cases, an association, whether
Page 185 of 195
registered or unregistered, cannot maintain a writ petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution for the enforcement or protection of the rights of its members,
as distinguished from the enforcement of its rights. It is not the pleaded case of
the writ petitioner, ‘Nagarik Adhikaar Suraksha Mancho’ that its members fall in
the category of ‘Little Indians’.
180. In Mani Subrat Jain [supra], it has been held that there must be a judicially
enforceable right as well as a legally protected right before one suffering a legal
grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only
when a person is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do
something or to abstain from doing anything. From the other decisions referred
to on behalf of the State respondents, it is discernable that it is a well settled
proposition that an unregistered association of person is not a juristic person and
a writ petition filed by an unregistered association is not maintainable. It has
been held that members forming an association to protect their interests, cannot
file a writ petition unless the association attains the character of a juristic person
or a legal person by registering it under a statute. An unregistered association
has no fundamental right to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. It has been observed that where a number of individuals
are affected by an official act, they can ordinarily bring a legal proceeding to
challenge that act only if all such persons join in the proceedings by name and
an unregistered association, in such a case, cannot maintain a writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution or other legal proceeding in its own name.
181. In State Land Use Board Casual Employees’ Association [supra], a Division
Bench of this Hon’ble Court has held that an unregistered association is not
juristic person. That apart, no legal or any other right of such an association can
be said to be violated. When the association is not an aggrieved person, it could
not have maintained a writ petition. If the grievances of the members of an
unregistered association are individual grievances, the writ petition should be
Page 186 of 195
filed by the persons aggrieved and not by an association, whose rights, if any,
cannot be said to be infringed.
182. In All Manipur DIC Supervisors’ Association [supra], the Hon’ble Court
recorded that the petitioner association was not registered under the Societies
Registration Act or under any other statute and the writ petition it filed was not
a public interest litigation. It was stated in the affidavit by the petitioner
association that ‘the petitioner association having disclosed the names and
service particulars of its members in an appendix to the writ petition, has got
legal entity to sue and be sued in law, though it has not been registered’. The
Hon’ble Court held that such disclosure did not confer any legal entity on the
petitioner association to maintain a legal proceeding. The Hon’ble Court took
note of the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Umesh Chand Vinod Kumar
[supra] vis-à-vis the factual foundation laid in that case. The Court has,
thereafter, proceeded to hold that there is nothing on record to show that the
members of the petitioner association are unable to approach the Court by
reason of poverty, disability or a socially or economically disadvantageous
position [‘Little Indians’]. Finding the writ petition as well as rejoinder affidavit
filed by the petitioner silent on the aspect, the Court held that the writ petition
filed by the petitioner association was not maintainable and on that count, the
writ petition was dismissed without entering into its merits.
183. In Meghalaya Wine Dealers Associaton [supra], a Division Bench of this Court
held that though members formed an association to protect their interest, but as
association, it cannot file a writ petition unless it attains the character of a juristic
person or a legal person by registering it under a statute. It was held that the
association, an unregistered one, cannot have locus standi to file a writ petition
inasmuch as it cannot be branded as an aggrieved person.
184. It is also settled that a decision of a larger Bench or a coordinate Bench of the
same Court is binding on a Bench of lesser strength or equal strength. Thus, the
Page 187 of 195
proposition laid down in the decisions, quoted above, that an unregistered
association of person cannot maintain a writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution is to be followed by this Bench.
185. It is discernible from the above decisions that an unregistered association has
otherwise, no fundamental or legal right to approach to a writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution. There is no averment in the writ petition to the
effect that the factors like poverty, illiteratness, helplessness and disability or
social or economic disadvantageous positions of the members of these
unregistered associations have prevented the members to approach the Court in
their individual capacity. There is nothing on record for the Court to hold that the
members of these unregistered associations are ‘Little Indians’. The other
decisions cited by the learned counsel of the petitioners in the afore-mentioned
writ petitions are not discussed as they are also found to be of no assistance to
the case of these petitioners.
186. In the above obtaining fact situations and in view of the settled proposition of
law, the writ petitions, W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 48/2025, both filed
by unregistered associations, are found to be not maintainable and the issue of
locus standi is decided against the writ petitioners therein. At the time of
preferring the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5771/2024, the petitioner was an
unregistered association. Though it has been stated that the petitioner had
registered itself subsequently under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on
06.01.2025, that is, during the pendency of the writ pettion, non-maintainability
of the writ petition on the point of lack of locus standi at the time of institution
of the writ petition cannot be remedied subsequently as the issue of
maintainability of a writ petition is to be examined in reference to the time of its
institution. Therefore, the issue of maintainability of the writ petition, W.P.[C]
no. 5771/2024 is decided in the same manner as like the afore-mentioned two
writ petitions, W.P.[C] no. 6829/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 48/2025. In any view of the
Page 188 of 195
matter, the points agitated in these three writ petitions are no different from the
other writ petitions of this batch.
XXVII. Scope of Judicial Review in matter relating to delimitation of
constituencies :-
187. Lastly, it is necessary to make a survey of the decisions cited by the parties with
regard to the ambit and scope of interference by the High Court in delimitation
matters exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the
Constitution.
188. Before a five-Judge Bench in Meghraj Kothari vs. Delimitation Commission
and others, reported in AIR 1967 SC 669, a challenge was made to a notification
of the Delimitation Commission whereby a city, Ujjain which had been a general
constituency, was notified as reserved for Scheduled Castes by the appellant-
petitioner. The Delimitation Commission had delimited the Parliamentary and
Assembly Constituencies in the State of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of powers
under Section 10[1] of the Delimitation Commission Act, 1962 and the same was
published in the Gazette of India on 15.10.1963 and also in the Official Gazette
of the State of Madhya Pradesh, after considering all objections and suggestions.
The petitioner alleged many acts of omission and commission on the part of the
Delimitation Commission. The ground of challenge for the petitioner was that
Ujjain City was a general constituency from the inception of the Constitution of
India and by the fact of the city being converted into a reserved constituency his
right to be a candidate for Parliament from the said Constituency had been taken
away. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that the impugned Notification was
a law relating to delimitation of the constituencies or the allotment of seats to
such constituencies made under Article 327 of the Constitution and that an
examination of Section 8 and Section 9 of the Delimitation Commission Act
showed that the matters therein dealt with not subject to scrutiny of any court
of law. It was observed that the Parliament by enacting Section 10[2] wanted to
Page 189 of 195
make it clear that orders passed under Section 8 and Section 9 were to be treated
as having the binding force of law and not mere administrative directions.
Although the impugned Notification was not a statute passed by Parliament, it
was still a law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of
seats to such constituencies made under Article 327 of the Constitution. The
Hon’ble Court had held that if the orders made under Section 8 and Section 9 of
the Delimitation Commission Act were not to be treated as final, the results would
be that any voter, if he so wished, could hold an election indefinitely by
questioning the delimitation of the constituencies from court to court. It was held
that although an order under Section 8 or Section 9 of the Delimitation
Commission Act and published under Section 10[1] of that Act is not part of an
Act of Parliament, its effect is the same. Section 10[4] of that Act puts such an
order in the said position as a law made by Parliament itself which could only be
made by it under Article 327 of the Constitution. The Hon’ble Court had took
note of the position that the Constitution has provided under Article 329[a] that
notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, the validity of any law relating to
the delimitation of constituencies or the allocation of seats to such constituencies,
made or purporting to be made under Article 327 or Article 328, shall not be
called in question in any court.The Hon’ble Court had proceeded to hold that
therefore, an order under Section 8 or Section 9 and published under Section
10[1] would not be saved merely because of the use of the expression ‘shall not
be called in question in any court’ but also for the fact that by the publication of
the order in the Gazette of India it is to be treated as law made under Article 327
and Article 329 would prevent any investigation by any court of law.
189. In Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samity [supra], the Hon’ble Supreme Court has
observed as under :-
45. …..If we read Articles 243-C, 243-K and 243-O in place of Article
327 and Sections 2[kk], 11-F and 12-BB of the Act in place of Sections 8
Page 190 of 195and 9 of the Delimitation Act, 1950, it will be obvious that neither the
delimitation of the panchayat area nor of the constituencies in the said
areas and the allotments of seats to the constituencies could have been
challenged nor the court could have entertained such challenge except on
the ground that before the delimitation, no objections were invited and no
hearing was given. Even this challenge could not have been entertained
after the notification for holding the elections was issued……
190. Before a three-Judge Bench in the case titled Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam
[DMK] vs. Secretary, Governor‘s Secretariat and others, reported in [2020]
6 SCC 548, the appellant had inter-alia challenged the alleged
unconstitutionality of altering constituencies on grounds of violation of the
mandates contained in Article 243D and Article 243T regarding delimitation of
constituencies which exercise was to be conducted after every decadal census
and concomitant reservation to be effected for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes on rotation basis. The Delimitation Commission, constituted under the
Tamil Nadu Delimitation Commission Act, 2017, initiated an exercise of
delimitation on 25.07.2017 and finally, formulated a draft ward limitation
proposal on 20.09.2017. Written objections were thereafter, invited from the
public, various political parties and organizations between 20.12.2017 and
18.01.2018. After considering such objections/suggestions and the revised
proposals received from District Delimitation Authorities, the Delimitation
Commission sent its final recommendation to the State Government on
31.08.2018. Thereafter, a Notification was issued by the State Government on
14.12.2018, whereby, the wards of Panchayats newly delimited as per the 2021
Census figures were notified. Thereafter, on 20.02.2019, the Delimitation
Commission forwarded proposal for reservation, whereupon post consideration,
the State Government vide Notifications – dated 20.05.2019, dated 21.05.2019
& dated 24.05.2019 – notified reserved seats for rural and urban local bodies in
the State. On 12.11.2019, the State Government issued a Notification dividing
Page 191 of 195
four existing districts of Tamil Nadu to create nine new districts. Resultantly,
some talukas were also restructured with certain revenue villages either being
added or removed. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had observed that before the
election process could begin as per the State Election Commission’s Press
Release dated 02.12.2019, the State of Tamil Nadu increased the number of
districts from 31 to 39 and also restructured various talukas.
190.1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court after an analysis of the various statutory provisions
and the constitutional scheme embodied in Part-IX of the Constitution and in the
backdrop of the preceding events including creation of nine new districts out of
four earlier districts, observed that the constitutional object of Part-IX cannot be
effectively achieved unless the delimitation exercise for constitution of local
bodies is properly undertaken. The Hon’ble Supreme Court took note of the fact
that at the completion of delimitation process, there were only 31 revenue
districts. It had been observed that despite a subsequent increase in number of
districts to 39, no fresh delimitation exercise was undertaken. It is in such
backdrop, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that the State Government
cannot fulfill the constitutional mandate since there was no identified data
elucidating population proportions and hence, requisite reservation for Schedule
Castes and Scheduled Tribes cannot be provided for, both in respect of village
panchayat wards or in district bodies. It was held that though the election
process was notified by the State Election Commission on 02.12.2019, the
election in respect of the newly created nine districts cannot be held unless fresh
delimitation exercise in respect thereto was first completed. In the said context,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court did not accept the plea of non-maintainability qua
the constitutional embargo contained in Article 243O and Article 243ZG of the
Constitution which bars ‘calling in question an election’. The respondents were
directed to delimit the nine newly constituted districts in accordance with law
and, thereafter, to hold election for their panchayats at the village, intermediate
and district levels within a period of four months. The Hon’ble Supreme Court
has further observed that there is no legal impediment against holding election
Page 192 of 195
for the panchayat at the village, intermediate and district levels for rest of the
districts in Tamil Nadu.
191. In Kishorchandra Chhaganlal Rathod vs. Union of India and others, 2024
INSC 579, the writ petition preferred by the appellant before the High Court
challenging the delimitation exercise, which resulted into reservation of Bardoli
Legislative Assembly Constituency, Gujarat for Scheduled Caste community was
dismissed. The constituency was reserved by the Delimitation Commission in
exercise of its powers under the Delimitation Act, 2002. The High Court relied
upon Article 329 of the Constitution to hold that there is a bar to interference by
the Court in the electoral matters and as such, the appellant’s challenge to the
Delimitation Commission’s order, which had received the assent of the President
of India, could not be called in question in any court of law. The High Court
dismissed the writ petition at the threshold for the bar to interference by Courts
in electoral matters embodied in Article 329[a] of the Constitution. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court has not, however, approved the view taken by the High Court
that the delimitation of constituencies, issued in exercise of statutory powers
under the Delimitation Act, is entirely insusceptible to the powers of judicial
review exercisable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Hon’ble
Court had proceeded to observe as under :-
5. …..Although Article 329 undeniably restricts the scope of judicial scrutiny
re: validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the
allotment of seats to such constituencies, it cannot be construed to have
imposed for every action of delimitation exercise. If judicial intervention is
deemed completely barred, citizens would not have any forum to plead their
grievances, leaving them solely at the mercy of the Delimitation Commission.
As a constitutional court and guardian of public interest, permitting such a
scenario would be contrary to the Court’s duties and the principle of
separation of powers.
Page 193 of 195
* * * * *
7. Therefore, while the Courts shall always be guided by the settled
principles regarding scope, ambit and limitations on the exercise of judicial
review in delimitation matters, there is nothing that precludes them to check
the validity of orders passed by Delimitation Commission on the touchstone
of the Constitution. If the order is found to be manifestly arbitrary and
irreconcilable to the constitutional values, the Court can grant the appropriate
remedy to rectify the situation.
8. In order to prove that any kind of judicial intervention is fully prohibited,
the respondents relied upon a Constitution Bench decision of this Court in
Meghraj Kothari vs. Delimitation Commission and others A closer examination
of the aforementioned case, however, would show that the Court in that case
restricted judicial intervention when the same would unnecessarily delay the
election process. This is writ large from the following paragraph, where the
Court explicated the reason behind adopting the hands-off approach :
20. In our view, therefore, the objection to the delimitation of
constituencies could only be entertained by the Commission
before the date specified. Once the orders made by the
Commission under Sections 8 and 9 were published in the
Gazette of India and in the Official Gazettes of the States
concerned, these matters could no longer be reagitated in a
court of law. There seems to be very good reason behind
such a provision. If the orders made under Sections 8 and 9
were not to be treated as final, the effect would be that any
voter, if he so wished, could hold up an election indefinitely
by questioning the delimitation of the constituencies from
court to court. Section 10[2] of the Act clearly demonstrates
the intention of the Legislature that the orders under Sections
Page 194 of 1958 and 9 published under Section 10[1] were to be treated as
law which was not to be questioned in any court.
[emphasis supplied]
9. Hence, the aforementioned judgment does not support the respondents’
contention regarding complete restriction on judicial review. A constitutional
court can undertake the exercise of judicial review within the limited sphere at
an appropriate stage.
192. In the cases in hand, no situations like the ones involved in Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam [supra] have arisen. Having analysed the the contentions put
forward by the petitioners and the stand of the State respondents along with the
overall procedure adopted for demitation of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik
Panchayats and Zilla Parishads and recorganisation of Development Blocks and
the reasons for adopting the procedure vis-à-vis the statutory and constitutional
provisions, the notifications issued for delimitation of the Gaon Panchayats,
Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads cannot be found to be manifestly
arbitrary and irreconcilable to the constitutional values.
XXVIII. Consclusion :-
193. In the light of the above discussion, the legality and validity of the actions
followed during the delimitation process of Gaon Panchayats, Anchalik
Panchayats and Zilla Parishads and reorganization process of Development
Blocks qua the challenges made by the petitioners have been examined in the
backdrop of the provisions contained in the Assam Panchayat Act, as amended.
For the reasons assigned at the appropriate places, the assail made taking resort
to amended Section 5[1] of the Assam Panchayat Act has been found to be not
acceptable in view of the finding reached that it is permissible for the State
Government to adjust the extent of existing Gaon Panchayats by inclusion or
exclusion of villages or local areas in the backdrop of developments, which took
Page 195 of 195
place due to ECI’s delimitation Order dated 11.08.2023, giving rise to the
necessity to reorganize the Development Blocks as well as the limits of Gaon
Panchayats, Anchalik Panchayats and Zilla Parishads and their constituencies.
The findings reached as regards the assail made qua the constitutional provision
contained in Article 243C have already been recorded hereinabove. The issue of
infringement of the petitioners’ rights associated with the delimitation process of
Panchayats and election to the Panchayats have been examined by taking into
consideration the facts and circumstances stated in these writ petitions and on
analysis, this Court is not persuaded to hold that any of the petitioners’ rights
associated with the delimitation process of Panchayats and election to the
Panchayats have been seriously infringed. Therefore, for the observations made,
the findings reached at and the reasons assigned hereinabove, this Court is of
the considered view that the prayers made and the directions sought for in this
batch of writ petitions are not ones which can be allowed. As a result, the
answers to the challenges made in these writ petitions are not in the affirmative.
Therefore, these writ petitions are to be dismissed. It is accordingly ordered.
There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant