Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/6990/2025 of SMTI TAJMINARA SULTANA AND ANR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS on 24 August 2026
GAHC010261742025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6990/2025 SMTI TAJMINARA SULTANA AND ANR WIFE OF MAHMUDUL HASSAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHALBARI, PS MANKACHAR ,PO PURANDIARA, DISTRICT SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR,
GAHC010261742025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6990/2025
SMTI TAJMINARA SULTANA AND ANR
WIFE OF MAHMUDUL HASSAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHALBARI, PS
MANKACHAR ,PO PURANDIARA, DISTRICT SOUTH SALMARA
MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 783135
2: MD MAHMUDUL ISLAM
SON OF LATE FOLA ROBBANI
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHALBARI
PO PURANDIYARA
PS MANKACHAR
DISTRICT SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REPESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE COMMISSIONER
TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
PANJABARI
JURIPAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
DISTRICT HATSINGIMARI
ASSAM
PIN 783135
4:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER
SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DISTRICT HATSINGIMARI ASSAM
PIN 783135
5:SMTI AKLIMA KHATUN
PRESIDENT NO.19 KATHALBARI GAON PANCHYAT VILLAGE
KATHALBARI BLOCK FEKAMARI PO PURANDIYARA DISTRICT SOUTH
SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM
PIN 783135
6:ATIMA KHATUN
VICE PRESIDENT NO 19 KATHALBARI GAON PANCHAYAT VILLAGE
CHARBARI BLOCK FEKAMARI PO PURANDIYARA DISTRICT SOUTH
SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM
PIN 783135
7:SMTI RUPALI BEGOM
MUKHYA NYAY SAKHI OFFICE OF KATHALBARI GAON PANCHAYAT
VILLAGE CHARBARI BLOCK FEKAMARI PO PURANDIYARA DISTRICT
SOUTH SALMARA KANKACHAR ASSAM
PIN 78313
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R. M. Deka, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. J. Handique, Jr. GA, Assam : Mr. S. Banik, Sr. Advocate : Ms. F. Begum, Advocate : Mr. S. Dutta, Standing counsel : Mr. M. Das, Advocate BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 25.08.2026
Heard Mr. R. M. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. I have also heard Mr. J. Handique, the learned Junior Government
Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4; Mr. S. Banik, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. F. Begum, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.5 and Mr. M. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.7.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the election of the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to the posts of President and Vice President of No.19, Kathalbari Gaon Panchayat in the First Meeting convened on 03.07.2025 as well as for other consequential directions.
3. It is the specific case of the Petitioners that though the meeting was convened on 03.07.2025 but the Petitioners were not informed by issuance of proper notice as is envisaged under Rule 46 of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1995.
4. On the other hand, it is the specific case of the Respondents that due notice was provided to the Petitioners and the Petitioners very well knew about the meeting and intentionally did not participate.
5. This Court takes note of Section 11 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 as amended vide the Assam Panchayat (Amendment) Act, 2023 wherein it is mandated that any dispute relating to the validity of the election of the President and the Vice
President of the Gaon Panchayat under the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 shall be decided by the District Commissioner. In the instant case, there are questions of facts to be decided as to whether there was due service upon the Petitioners.
6. This Court has also taken note of that the Petitioners have taken oath on 11.07.2025 and thereupon had approached this Court by filing the present writ petition on 24.11.2025.
7. Taking into account the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition inasmuch as the Petitioners have an alternative and a efficacious remedy wherein disputed questions of facts as to whether the Petitioners have been duly served a notice or not can be adjudicated.
8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition therefore stands dismissed as not being entertained.
9. Before parting with the records, this Court however, observes that the dismissal of the instant writ petition shall not preclude or prejudice the Petitioners to approach the District Commissioner, South Salmara, Mankachar in terms of Section 11 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant