MAIANTIS MAWLOT Vs. KHASI HILLS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner, while asserting that he was appointed as an Agent by the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (hereinafter referred to as "KHADC" or "the Council") "for detecting illegal trading by non-tribals" and while further asserting that his agency was lastly renewed for a period of two years from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2017, has assailed the orders issued by the Executive Committee of KHADC on 30.03.2016 and 31.03.2016 (Annexures 9 and 10), whereby his agency was terminated w.e.f. 31.03.2016 for the alleged engagement of new Agent for the task in question, in terms of the Notice Inviting Tender ["NIT"] dated 22.02.2016.

(2.) Put in a nutshell, the case of petitioner is that the respondents related with KHADC have terminated his agency in a wholly illegal, arbitrary and unfair manner and squarely contrary to the stipulations in the existing agreement between the parties. Per contra, the contesting respondents would assert that the earlier engagement of the petitioner and extension of the term of his engagement had been without open invitation to offers; and such kind of arrangement having been disapproved by this Court in the order dated 25.09.2014 as passed in WP(C) No.133 of 2014 and WP(C) No.138 of 2014, KHADC has rightly invited the offers and has rightly appointed the respondent No.4 as its Agent w.e.f. 01.04.2016.

(3.) Although the basic issue raised in this petition has only been on the legality and validity of the procedure adopted by KHADC in terminating the agency of the petitioner but then, looking to the nature of agency sought to be suggested by the parties, the learned Senior Government Advocate was also called upon to address and to assist the Court. In response, the learned Senior Government Advocate has made elaborate submissions that the entire exercise of appointment of any Agent like the petitioner or the respondent No.4 by KHADC was illegal and unauthorised. As permitted, the learned Senior Government Advocate has also placed on record a note on his submissions. The relevant factual aspects of the matter could be taken note of as follows: The petitioner has averred in the petition that as empowered by Paragraph 10 of Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India, to make regulations for control of money-lending and trading by non-tribals, KHADC has enacted the Khasi Hills District (Trading by Non-Tribals) Regulation, 1954 [hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations of 1954"] and has also framed the rules thereunder, being the Khasi Hills Autonomous District (Trading by Non-Tribals) Rules, 1959 [hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1959"]. The petitioner has alleged that for the operation of the Regulations and as per the provisions contained therein, the respondent KHADC has appointed the officers and other staff to carry out the necessary work of checking and controlling the trading by the non-tribals in its area; and in that sequence, he was engaged "as an agent to identify/detect non-tribal traders conducting business without a valid trading license at Nongshram Shahlang and other areas in West Khasi Hills" under the appointment orders dated 19.01.2010 and 25.01.2010. The petitioner has further asserted that thereafter, under a Memo dated 07.12.2012 and an agreement of the even date, his appointment was extended/renewed until 31.03.2015; and he was working "as agent to identify/detect non-tribal commercial transport operators conducting business without a valid trading license in Nongshram Shahlang and other areas in West Khasi Hills". The petitioner has placed on record a copy of the said agreement as Annexure 4 to this petition and has particularly referred to Clause 6 thereof to assert that it was obligatory on KHADC to inform him, should there be any legal developments or changes in the Council's policy or implementation of new rules; and to afford him an opportunity to represent.