Back
2015 Supreme(Gau) 1027
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Ujjal Bhuyan and Manojit Bhuyan, JJ.
Unity Village and others - Appellant
Versus
State of Nagaland and others – Respondent
WA No. 5(K) of 2015.
Decided on : 08-10-2015.
For the Appellant :Taka Masa, Sr. Advocate and Arenlong, Advocate.
For the Respondent:T.B. Jamir, Addl. AG, Zhimoni, Imti Longjem, S.M. Ozukum, Joshua, Esther and Vinoli, Advocates.
Headnote:
Nagaland Village and Tribal Councils Act, 1978 - Section 20 - Order of dissolution - Appointment of appellants as village council members - Public meeting was held in the Unity village and elected village council members including the Chairman and Secretary for a period of 5 years - This was communicated by the Chairman to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur - It appears that Home Department, Government of Nagaland had approved constitution of the village council by the appellants as per provisions of the Nagaland Village and Tribal Councils Act, 1978 (1978 Act) which was conveyed to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur – Held, satisfaction is reached and the order of dissolution passed, the same has to be published in the State Gazette. But before that it has be placed before the Assembly for ratification. Only after ratification with or without modification the order of dissolution will become effective. It is also a well settled proposition of law that when a law requires a thing to be done in a particular way, it has to be done in that way and in no other way; other methods of performance are necessarily prohibited. This salutary principle of administrative law has been consistently followed by the Constitutional Courts of the country since the decision in Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor reported in AIR 1936 Privy Council 253 following the English decision in Taylor v. Taylor. are unable to agree to the view taken by the learned Single Judge remanding the matter back to the State Government for fresh consideration. Accordingly, we set aside that portion of the order of the learned Single Judge, remanding the matter to the State Government for fresh consideration - Appeal is allowed.
Ujjal Bhuyan, J.
Heard Mr. Taka Masa, learned senior counsel for the appellants, Mr. T.B. Jamir, learned Addl. A.G, Nagaland for respondents No. 1 to 4 and Mr. Imti Longjem, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.5.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.(C) No.57(K)/2015 filed by the appellants as the writ petitioners.
3. Appellant No. 1 is the Unity village which is a Government recognised village and is represented by its Chairman. Appellant No.2 is the Secretary of the Village Council whereas appellants No. 3 to 22 are village council members.
4. According to the appellants, a public meeting was held in the Unity village on 3.2.2014 and elected village council members including the Chairman and Secretary for a period of 5 years. This was communicated by the Chairman to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur on 4.2.2014. It appears that Home Department, Government of Nagaland had approved constitution of the village council by the appellants as per provisions of the Nagaland Village and Tribal Councils Act, 1978 (1978 Act) which was conveyed to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur on 7.7.2014. Thereafter, Deputy Commissioner issued order on 18.7.2014 appointing the village council members of Unity village as per Government approval. Thus, appellants came to be appointed as village council members of Unity village.
5. It appears that respondent No.5 and others had raised objection to the appointment of the appellants as village council members. Objection was submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur on 2.8.2014. It was contended that the general meeting referred to in the selection of village council members was in fact held for a different purpose, namely, to celebrate recognition of the village by State Government. Constitution of the village council did not reflect popular mandate of the village.
6. Extra Assistant Commissioner, Chumukedima passed an order dated 8.12.2014 stating that as per direction of the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur village council members were restrained from performing their functions/duties.
7. Appellants approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.242(K)/2014 challenging the legality and validity of the restraint order dated 8.12.2014. During the pendency of the writ proceeding, Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur made a reference dated 3.2.2015 to the Commissioner, Nagaland for resolution of the dispute under Section 20 of the 1978 Act. It was stated that a dispute had arisen regarding selection/election of the village council members of Unity village. Therefore, the reference was made.
8. This Court by order dated 19.3.2015 took note of the reference dated 3.2.2015 and disposed of the writ petition by directing the State to take a decision on the reference made within six weeks. Restraint order dated 8.12.2014 was quashed. Observation was made that the State would take an independent decision in the matter and in the event the appellants were aggrieved, they would have the liberty to approach this Court.
9. Joint Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Home Department informed the Commissioner on 30.3.2015 approval of the Government for dissolution of the village council of Unity village. Commissioner was requested to direct the district administration of Dimapur for re-constituting the village council as per provisions contained in Section 4 of the 1978 Act. Office of the Commissioner, Nagaland thereafter, conveyed the aforesaid decision to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur on 1.4.2015.
10. This led to filing of the related writ petition W.R(C) No.57(K)/2015 by the appellants. It was contended before the learned Single Judge that if it is a case of dissolution of village council, Section 54 of the 1978 Act would apply and in the event of invoking the provisions of Section 54, the requirements laid down under the said Section would have to be complied with. Noncompliance to the preconditions would render the order passed under S
