GAHC010085202025

2025:GAU-AS:5340 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/2141/2025 MD SHAIED AHMED SON OF LATE ALI AHMED, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALAHJURI, GARUKHUTI, MOIRABARI, MORIGAON, ASSAM PIN 782106 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI -781006

2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI - 781022

3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MORIGAON DISTRICT - MORIGAON ASSAM. PIN 782105

4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MORIGAON ZILLA PARISHAD MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 782105

5:THE CO DISTRICT COMMISSIONER LAHARIGHAT CO DISTRICT P.O. AND P.S. LAHARIGHAT DISTRICT MORIGAON ASSAM. PIN - 782127

6:THE RETURNING OFFICER AUTHORISED OFFICER

56 NO. BORCHOLA GAON PANCHAYAT P.O. AND P.S. LAHARIGHAT DISTRICT - MORIGAON ASSAM. PIN - 782127

7:MD ABUL NASUR SON OF ABUL KASEM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PALAHJURI GARUKHUTI MOIRABARI MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 78210 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. P. KASHYAP, M K BORAH,MR P BHARDWAJ Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

ORDER

Date : 01-05-2025 Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P.

Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. K. Konwar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam and Senior Standing Counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development Department for the respondent nos. 1 – 5; and Mr. R. Dubey, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Election Commission for the respondent no. 6.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking inter alia a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside and quashing an impugned notification issued under the hand of the respondent no. 6, whereby, the respondent no. 6 has declared that the nomination paper of the respondent no. 7, impleaded herein, has been accepted to contest the election for the member of Gaon Panchayat from Ward no. 203 of 56 no. Borchola Gaon Panchayat. The petitioner has also challenged an action on the part of the respondent no. 6 as the respondent no. 6 has not included the nomination of the petitioner in the list of candidates whose nominations are found valid.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he, in order to contest the election for the post of Gaon Panchayat Member from Ward no. 203 under 56 no. Borchola Gaon Panchayat, submitted his nomination on 11.04.2025 before the respondent no. 6, who is the Returning Officer/Authorised Officer appointed under Rule 22 of the Assam Panchayat [Constitution] Rules, 1995.

4. As per sub-rule [2] of Rule 22, such Returning Officer/Authorised Officer is entrusted to discharge the following duties and responsibilities : [a] examine the nomination papers on the date, time and place notified for the purpose under the Rule; [b] give the candidate or his proposer reasonable opportunity to examine the nomination paper and shall decide on the spot, the objections, if there be any, by summary enquiry. He may either on his own initiative or an objection raised, reject any nomination on any of the following grounds :- [i] that the candidate is not qualified under the provisions of the act; [ii] that he is disqualified from being chosen to fill the office or that he is disqualified since requisite amount of security deposit has not been paid; [iii] that there has been failure to comply with any of the provisions of these Rules; and [iv] that the signature or thumb-impression of the candidate or the proposer is not genuine. It has been provided that nothing in sub-clauses [iii] and [iv] above shall be deemed to authorise the rejection of the nomination paper of any candidate on the ground of irregularity in respect of a nomination paper, if the candidate has duly nominated by means of other nomination paper in respect of which no irregularity has been comm