The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the provisions of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956 and the legal precedent set by the court in previous cases when leasing out municipal properties.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. B. Malakar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. S.R. Baruah, learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. N.H. Rajbarbhuiyan, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.8 & 9. None have choosen to appear on behalf of the respondent Nos.4 to 7.

2. The instant Writ Petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside and quashing the impugned letters dated 10.07.2014, issued by the Chairman In-Charge of the respondent No.4 of the Badarpur Town Committee, Badarpur whereby the market place was leased out to the private respondent Nos.6—9. The petitioners have also sought for a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Chairman of the Badarpur Town Committee, Badarpur not to proceed for settlement of the Badarpur Town Committee Market Complex, without following the statutory Rules, laid under the Assam Municipal Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act of 1956’).

3. The fact as is discernable from the perusal of the pleadings is that the Badarpur Town Committee had constructed a two storied building, having approximately 3400 sq. ft. on each floor, for its office purpose and for Municipal Market on the land owned and possessed by Badarpur Town Committee. After construction of the said building, the Badarpur Town Committee had let out the ground floor of the said building measuring around 3400 sq. ft. to some individuals for their shop in the said market building complex. The office of the Badarpur Town Committee was proposed to be accommodated over 1400 sq. ft. in the first floor of the said building and the remaining 2000 sq. ft. in the first floor of the said building Complex was proposed to be leased out for their trade/organizational purpose of various organizations.

4. The petitioner came to learn that the respondent No.5, who was the Chairman In-Charge of the Badarpur Town Committee then had carried out certain illegal activities of allotment of the remaining space of 2000 sq. ft. in the first floor of the Market Complex, without following the mandate as per the Act of 1956 and the Rules framed therein under. Under such circumstances, the petitioner submitted a representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj District on 05.07.2014. The Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj thereupon directed the Circle Officer, Badarpur Circle to conduct an enquiry by the communication dated 09.07.2014 and to submit the report. Immediately thereupon, on 10.07.2014, the private respondent Nos.6—9 were issued the allotment letters, which have been enclosed as Annexure-4 series. These letters have been put to challenge by way of the instant Writ Petition.

5. The record reveals that the instant Writ Petition was filed on 13.08.2014 and by the order dated 22.08.2014, this Court had issued notice and in the interim, directed that the allotment of the space on the first floor of the Badarpur Town Committee Market Complex by the In-Charge Chairman of the Badarpur Town Committee made on 10.07.2014 (Annexure-4 series) shall remain stayed. The record reveals that the said interim order had been extended from time to time.

6. It is relevant to note that in spite of receipt notice, the Badarpur Town Committee had not chosen to appear nor filed their affidavit-in-opposition. The private respondent Nos.6 & 7 had also not filed their affidavit-in-opposition. The respondent No.3 had filed an affidavit-in-opposition through the Circle Officer of Badarpur Revenue Circle on 23.01.2015. It has been mentioned in the said affidavit that pursuant to the direction passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj District, the Circle Officer of Badarpur Revenue Circle had conducted an enquiry and found out that some of the so called lessee had started construction in the first floor of the Badarpur Town Committee building and some RCC pillars were constructed. It was also mentioned that the earlier lease agreements with some private parties and NGO’s are not