The main legal point established in the judgment is that no private individual or committee, dehors the Law, shall be allowed to interfere with and influence the decision of the Municipal Board in naming the roads of the area under Silchar Municipal Board.

Heard Mr. J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department appearing for the respondent No.1, Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos.2 & 3, Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 & 5 and Ms. S.S. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.6—10.

2. Being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent authorities, with regard to the illegal change of nomenclature of ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’ in Ward No.5 of Silchar by the respondent No.6 to ‘Raj Chandra Dev Sarani’, on the ground of violation of the provisions of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, the present Writ Petition is filed, praying for a direction to remove the signboard/hoarding from the Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur, in Ward No.5 i.e. the road connecting from Southern side of the new Barak Bridge to Rajpath Road at Silchar, wherein the respondent No.6 has displayed the name of the road as “Raj Chandra Dev Sarani,” without any authority of law and for consideration of the representations filed by the petitioner and the people of the area.

3. The petitioner claims to be the grandson of Late Baidyanath Nath, in whose name the road connecting from Southern side of the new Barak Bridge to Rajpath Road in Ward No.5 was recognized as ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’, in the year 1997. It is projected that the grandfather of the petitioner Late Baidyanath Nath was the pioneer in journalism in the Barak Valley and was also associated with the freedom struggle in the area. In recognition of his contribution, the road in question had been named as the ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’, following the procedure for recognition of such area and the road and the road connecting from Southern side of the new Barak Bridge to Rajpath Road is duly recognized and accepted as the ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’, by the people of the area since last 25 years. It is also projected that in all the records including the address of the area is recognized as the ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’.

4. It is contended by the petitioner that suddenly in the month of January, 2022, a signboard was found to be erected in the name of ‘Raj Chandra Dev Sarani’, by illegally changing the name of ‘Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur’, without the knowledge of the inhabitants within the jurisdiction of Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur area at Silchar and without the authority of law. It has come to the knowledge of the petitioner that the same has been erected at the instance of one committee, namely, Rajchandra Dev Sarani Unnayan Committee, represented by its President Sri Gopal Das, Respondent No.6 herein.

5. The petitioner has filed a representation before the D.C., Cachar at Silchar on 08.02.2022, placing his grievance against such action of the respondent Nos.6—10. The residents of the area, twenty two (22) in numbers, have also submitted an application for removing the signboards, wherein it is mentioned as the ‘Raj Chandra Dev Sarani’, before the Executive Officer of Silchar Municipal Board. However, no appropriate action has been taken by the Respondent authorities.

6. Mr. J.I. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.6 is a Committee, formed without any authority of law and the members of the Committee are persons with vested interest. The road/area in question has been recognized as the Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur, by following the due procedure as required under the law and is being accepted since last 25 (twenty five) years. Mr. Barbhuiya further submits that the illegal act on the part of the respondent Nos.6—10 in erecting and putting up of hoarding/signboard by changing the nomenclature of “Baidyanath Sarani, Rongpur” to "Raj Chandra Dev Sarani”, is in violation of the provision of Section 170 of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, wherein it is provided that the Board at a meeting may cause a name to be given t