IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
Nchumo Yanthan S/o Late Atsamo Yanthan – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Nagaland and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 142 of 2021
Decided On : 17-10-2023
Village Council Chairman Selection - Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978 - Section 7(1)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the selection of respondent No. 5 as Village Council Chairman of Lakhuti Village Council, alleging irregularities in the selection process and misappropriation of public funds. The respondent No. 5 was appointed by an order dated 26th July, 2021, which was impugned in the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the selection of respondent No. 5 as Chairman of Lakhuti Village Council was based on votes from Village Council Members of certain Khels, which were under suspension pending a final decision from the Government. The court set aside the appointment order and directed the authorities to initiate the process of selecting a new Chairman in accordance with the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the selection process, allegations of misappropriation of funds, and the authority of the Village Council Members to choose the Chairman.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 7(1) of the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978, which provides for the Village Council to choose a Chairman. It also considered the suspension of the order related to the Village Council Members' selection pending a final decision from the Government.
Final Decision: The court set aside the appointment order of respondent No. 5 and directed the authorities to initiate the process of selecting a new Chairman in accordance with the provisions of the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978.
JUDGMENT :
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
1. Heard Mr. W.R. Ngullie, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Nagaland and Mr. L. Iralu, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.
2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners impugning the selection of respondent No. 5, as Village Council Chairman of Lakhuti Village Council by appointment order bearing No. DCW-COUN-1/2020-21/698-4 dated 26th July, 2021.
3. The petitioners’ case, in brief, is as follows:
(ii) That, accordingly, the Lakhuti Village Council/GBs had convened a meeting dated 12.03.2021 and in the said meeting, the terms and conditions for conducting the election/selection and eligibility of the Village Council Members were formulated and it was resolved as follows:
(i) He should be a bonafide member of the Khel/colony.
(ii) He should not be a convicted person for theft.
(iii) He should not married a person from the same clan.
(iv) The selected/elected name (VCM) shall be endorsed by the concern GB of the Khel/colony.
(v) He should be a person who can read and write (literate person).
(vi) Selection/election of VCM must complete and submit on 20-03-2021, scrutiny shall be done on 22-03-2021 and thereafter, the final list shall be submitted to the office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (respondent No. 03) on 23-03-2021.”
(iii) Thereafter, the scrutiny of selected/elected members was conducted on 22.03.2021 in the presence of Extra Assistant Commissioner, Aitepyong along with 3(three) dobhashis and 13(thirteen) GBs and one Head GB. After proper scrutiny on 22.03.2021, the head GB (petitioner No. 1) along with the GBs of Lakhuti Village accepted the names of 11 members and forwarded the list containing the names of 11 members to the Government for approval on 29th March, 2021.
(iv) Thereafter, on 01.04.2021, the petitioner No. 1, on behalf of all the 13 GBs submitted a representation to respondent No. 4 affirming the resolution adopted by the GBs on 12.03.2021 as well as affirming the outcome of the scrutiny which was done on 22.03.2021.
(v) However, it has been alleged that respondent No. 4 i.e. Extra Assistant Commissioner, Aitepyong, on 3rd April, 2021, along with Head Dobhashi, Aitepyong had forcibly confined the Head GB, Lakhuti Village (petitioner No. 1) and made him to sign certain documents without reading out and explaining the contents of the said documents which as reported by petitioner No. 1 to the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha by filing two separate representations on 03.04.2021 and 15.04.2021.
(vi) On 10th June, 2021, by letter No. GAB-01/WKA/VCM/2020- 21(PT), the respondent No. 1 had accorded approval to newly elected Village Council Members in respect of Wokha district and the names of Etongo Yantham, Elongthung Ezung, Merithung Patton, Chumdamo Humtsoe and Wochuthung Yantham appeared in serial No. 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 respectively but they were not selected by their respective Clan/Khel. However, names of Likhyamo Kikon and Misamo Patton who were selected by their Clan/K
The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Village Council to choose a Chairman as per Section 7(1) of the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978, and the impact of the ....
The statutory mandate of Section 20 of the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978 should not be overlooked in disputes over the selection of Village Council Members.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the replacement of a selected Village Council Member must be based on statutory grounds and due process, as provided in the Nagaland Village C....
The main legal point established is that the selection of Village Council Members must be in accordance with prevailing customary practices and usages, and should involve consultation with the whole ....
When a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by the reasons so mentioned and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in the shape of affidavit or ....
The selection of Village Council Members must comply with customary practices and the Nagaland Village Councils Act, ensuring fair representation of all clans regardless of household numbers.
The Court established that removal from office must be preceded by a show cause notice and an opportunity to defend, aligning with principles of natural justice.
The Deputy Commissioner's decision regarding VDB member selection must be reasonable and based on evidence of majority support from clans.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.