Back
1981 Supreme(Gau) 13
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
K. LAHIRI, JJ.
Md.Rustom Ali -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam and others -Respondent
Civil Rule No. 366 of 1980
Decided On : 07-02-1981
D. K. Bhattacharyya and B. P. Bora, for Petitioner: A. M. Mazumdar, S. Ali and S. Huda
A tenderer is not a defaulter for the purpose of Clause 18 of the Tender Notice if he is not a defaulter on the date of consideration of his tender.
Headnote:
PANCHAYATI RAJ - SETTLEMENT OF BAZAR - UNSETTLEMENT OF PETITIONER AND DIRECT SETTLEMENT IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT BY STATE GOVERNMENT - VALIDITY - INTERPRETATION OF CLAUSE 18 OF TENDER NOTICE - DEFAULTER - MEANING AND SCOPE - ASSAM PANCHAYATI RAJ ACT, 1972, SECTIONS 133, 138(2).
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, who had been settled with the Jaluguti Bazar for the year 1980-81, challenged the impugned order by which the State Government unsettled him and awarded the settlement in favor of Respondent No.4. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was based on erroneous findings that he was a defaulter in payment of land revenue and that he had failed to submit the required certificates along with his tender.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner was not a defaulter on the date of consideration of the tenders and that the Executive Committee was justified in not rejecting his tender as he was not a defaulter on the date of consideration of the tenders. The court also held that the finding that the petitioner was a defaulter in payment of land revenue was erroneous in law and based on no material.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was a defaulter in payment of land revenue? 2. Whether the Executive Committee was justified in not rejecting the petitioner's tender?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioner was not a defaulter on the date of consideration of the tenders as he had paid up all his arrear land revenue on that date. The court also held that the provision of Clause 18 of the Tender Notice, which provides that a tender shall be rejected if the tenderer is a defaulter of Government revenue, should be construed strictly and that the only bar is that the tenderer should not be a defaulter on the date of consideration of his tender. 2. The court held that the Executive Committee was justified in not rejecting the petitioner's tender as he was not a defaulter on the date of consideration of the tenders.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order and made the Rule absolute. However, there was no order as to costs.
The State has unsettled the settlement of Jaluguti Bazar. The Executive Committee. Morigaon Mahkuma Parishad had settled it with the petitioner for the year 1980-81 (1-7-80 to 30-6-81). By the impugned order D/- 4-10-80 the State awarded the settlement in favour of Respondent No.4. The petitioner had by that time managed the bazar almost continuously, on due execution of the lease deed and upon payment of Rs. 42,000/- and odd. By virtue of the impugned order Respondent No.4 could have enjoyed it for a broken period of about 7 months only and he can enjoy it for about 4 months henceforward. The order of unsettlement of the petitioner as well as direct settlement in favour of Respondent No.4 by the State Government is a composite order which has been questioned by the petitioner in this writ application. The battle for settlement commenced on 19-6-80 and the field of battle is covered by the Assam Panchayat Raj Act.
2. The word "Panch" has an ancient flavour: it has a special meaning and significance to our heritage and civilization. From the days of Panch Pandava to Panchasila, the figure (five) has had magical touch. The word is as old as Indian history and civilization. In fact, the word "Panch" literally conveys, an assemblage of 5 village elders. They were de facto and de lure Government of the villages. The term "panch" or "Panchayat" and the system of Panchayat were enlivened, renovated and reshaped by the Father of the Nation, who spoke about the Panchayats as:
"The true democracy cannot be worked out by 20 men sitting at the centre. It has to be worked from below by the people from every village. True rights come as a result of duty done. No one can snatch away such rights. The Panch is there to serve the people in the true democracy of India the unit is the village. Even if one village wants Panchayati Raj which is called Republic in English no one can stop it" -Harijan (18-1-48 P.518). He said:-
"Independence must begin at the bottom. Thus every village will be a Republic or Panchayat having full powers. It follows therefore that every village has to be self-sustained and capable of managing its affairs...It will be free and voluntary play of mutual force." -(Harijan 28-7-46 p. 236). Speaking about the function of the Panchayati system Gandhi, observed:-
"It is function of the Panchayat to revive honesty and industry. It is a function of the Panchayat to teach the villagers to avoid dispute if they have to ....... The greater the power of the Panchayat the better for the people." Emphasis of Gandhijees dream found expression in the preamble to the Constitution of India which underlines strong, healthy and invigorating Panchayati system. Spurred by the father of the nation, the State Governments including the State of Assam made several Panchayati laws and guaranteed self Government to the panchayats. It is also one of the Directive Principles of State policy to uphold, organise village Panchayats and to endow these with powers and authorities to enable them to function as units of self Governments- vide Article 40, Constitution. The preamble to the Assam Panchayati Raj Act. 1972 reads:
"Whereas it is expedient to amend and consolidate the laws relating to Local Self-Government in the villages of the State of Assam with a view to enable the Panchayati Raj institutions to function more effectively as units of self-Government."
Chapter III of the Act expressly bestows self-Government to the Panchayats in the fields of sanitation and health, public works and education, sports and cultures, self-defence and many other spheres or activities. Upon grant of such large power, the Government retained some control and supervision over the constitutions with the object to make the institutions strong and healthy but not to wreck their independence or upset their day to day functioning. Control and supervision ought to be slow and minimal: nothing ought to be done to destroy the independent character of the local bodies
