JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Jonathan L. Salio, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears for the respondents despite notice.

2. On 12.07.2022, the petitioner No.1 has filed the affidavit stating service of notice by dasti process upon the respondent No. 1, 2, 3 & 4.

This Court has also by order dated 14.07.2022 observed that notice upon all the respondents is deemed completed. By the said order, this Court has further observed that if the respondents are not represented again on the next date the court may consider taking up the matter for final disposal on the basis of the materials available on record in view of the issue involved including public interest.

3. The petitioners are elected members of the Udalthana-II Village Council, Lawngtlai District, Mizoram under Chakma Autonomous District Council (CADC). The petitioners were elected in the General Election conducted on 13.03.2020 in exercise of the power conferred under Rule-3 of the Chapter-I of the Chakma Autonomous District Council (CADC) (Election to Village Council) Rules, 2007. Consequent to the election of the petitioners, the respondent No.2 accorded approval for appointment of the petitioner No.1 as the President of Udalthana-II Village Council and the petitioner No.2 as the Vice-president of the said council. The Executive Body of Udalthana-II Village Council was thereafter formed with the petitioner No.1 as the President, the petitioner No.2 as the Vice-President and the petitioner No.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 as the members. While, the petitioners were functioning as the Executive Body of said Village Council, a group of person lodged the complaint dated Nil against the petitioners for mismanagement of the affairs of the village council. The respondent No.1 & 2 accordingly issued the order No. 72/2021 dated 06.12.2021 appointing Shri. Mrinal Kanti Chakma, Assistant Local Administration Officer (ALAO) to immediately conduct verification on the complaint made against the petitioners. The enquiry was conducted by summoning the petitioners, complainant and also the Chakma Mahila Udalthana-II Branch and by recording their statements and consequent to which the Enquiry Officer on 16.12.2021 submitted the report. In the report, the Enquiry Officer gave a finding that the Village Executive Body did not commit any wrong or financial mismanagement and the allegation made against the petitioners were found to be false.

4. That however, in spite of the Enquiry Report submitted by the Assistant Local Administration Officer (ALAO), the respondent No. 2 issued the impugned notification dated 10.02.2022 suspending the Executive Body of Udalthana-II Village Council for a period of 3(three) months with immediate effect and appointing the respondent No.4 as the Administrator to look after the functions of the Village Council President without any financial benefits.

5. Mr. Jonathan L. Sailo, learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submits that in the impugned notification dated 10.02.2022, section 9 of the CADC (Village Councils) (Amendment) Act, 2011 has been wrongly quoted for section 14 and section 12 has been wrongly quoted for section 26.

6. Secondly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the allegation against the petitioners could not be substantiated in the enquiry, the respondents issued the impugned notification suspending the Executive Body of Udalthana-II Village Council without any valid grounds.

7. Thirdly, it is submitted that the impugned notification dated 10.02.2022 was served on the petitioners only by the whats app text and that too without any prior notice. It is also submitted that the suspension of the village council is for a period of 3(three) months w.e.f. 10.02.2022 and the 3(three) month’s period has lapsed. Therefore, on the expiry of the suspension period, the Executive Body of the Village Council must be restored to its original form.

8. Fourthly, the learned counsel submits that there is no provision either under the Chakma Autonomous Dis