Back
2020 Supreme(Gau) 356
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Michael Zothankhuma, S.K. Medhi, JJ.
Jomgum Padu - Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 6 of 2020
Decided On : 24-02-2020
Indraneel Chowdhury, Advocate
The court may exercise writ jurisdiction for enforcement of fundamental rights and when orders are wholly without jurisdiction.
Headnote:
Ex-Communication - Land Dispute - Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 - AFR, 1945 - Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India
Fact of the Case:
The respondent No. 1 lodged a complaint against the appellant No. 2 for encroaching upon his land. The village authorities conducted a Keba meeting and subsequently ex-communicated the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and their families from the village, leading to a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The learned Single Judge held that the ex-communication violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India, and set aside the Keba decision. The court also reduced the exemplary cost imposed on the respondents.
Issues: Violation of fundamental rights, validity of ex-communication, alternative remedy available
Ratio Decidendi: The ex-communication decision was not justified under the AFR, 1945 or the Constitution of India. The court may exercise writ jurisdiction for enforcement of fundamental rights and when orders are wholly without jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The impugned Judgment was modified to set aside the ex-communication decision and reduce the imposed cost.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Govt. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 as well as Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 to 6.
2. This appeal has been filed by the Head Gaon Burah, Darka-III as the appellant No. 1 and one Sh. Pegam Ete as the appellant No. 2, against the judgment & order dated 12.12.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018, by which the writ petition was allowed.
wxyz
The learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment has set aside the order passed by the village authority Ex-Communicating the respondent Nos. 1 to 4/writ petitioners and their family members from the village Darka-I and Darka-II and imposed exemplary cost of Rs. 20,000/- on the respondent Nos. 5 & 6.
zyxw
3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent No. 1 lodged a complaint with the Head Gaon Burahs of Darka-I and Darka-II against the appellant No. 2, on the ground that the appellant No. 2 was encroaching upon the "Guar land" of the respondent No. 1 by excavating the land. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1 apparently re-erected the damaged fencing of the land. As the respondent No. 1 was a Government Servant, posted at Tezu, the respondent No. 1 went back to his place of posting.
4. That the village authorities decided to conduct a Keba on 28.02.2018 and to that effect, a Parwana (Summons) dated 20.02.2018 was issued. The respondent Nol. 1 apparently could not attend the said Keba Meeting. The Keba was again fixed on another date, but due to some other reason, the respondent No. 1 could not attend the said Keba Meeting also. On 09.03.2018, when the respondent No. 1 went to the encroached site, he found that his reerected fencing had been completely destroyed. On enquiry, he came to learn that the reerected fencing had been destroyed by some villagers and the appellant No. 2 at the behest of the village authorities. The respondent No. 1 thereafter sent a letter dated 16.03.2018 through his counsel to the village authorities, stating that they should not press for his presence before the Keba, for settlement of his complaint, as he intended to move the Civil Court with regard to his grievance.
5. Title Suit No. 4/2018 along with Misc. Case No. 10/2018 under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC was filed by the respondent No. 1 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aalo. The Court of the Civil Judge thereafter passed a temporary injunction order dated 23.03.2018, restraining the appellant No. 2 from excavating and constructing a road over the land of the respondent No. 1.
6. The village authorities thereafter served another Parwana (Summons) dated 29.03.2018 to the respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 informing them that they should attend the Keba to be held at Darka General Community Hall on 12.04.2018. The respondent Nos. 1 & 2 informed the village authorities that a Civil Suit was already pending with regard to the encroached property and they could not attend the Keba. The respondent Nos. 1 & 2 did not attend the Keba held on 12.04.2018 and an Ex-Parte decision dated 12.04.2018 was passed by the Keba Meeting, wherein it was held that the people of Darka allowed the appellant No. 2 to continue construction of the road and that the road built upon the disputed land did not belong to the respondent No. 1. Subsequent to the above Ex-Parte decision dated 12.04.2018 passed by the Keba, another decision was passed by the Keba on 14.06.2018, with regard to the construction of the road over the disputed land, which held that the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had created problems while constructing the 2 roads from DARKA OMGI to ITBP and DARKA OMGI to YEGGO HYDEL. Accordingly, the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and their families were Ex-Communicated from the Darka community and the villagers were not allowed to have any interaction whatsoever with them.
7. The Ex-Communication of the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, as recorded in
