KALI KANTA CHOUDHURY AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of three petitions, Nos. 146, 148 and 165 of 1953, all under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. These petitions are directed against an order of the Governor of Assam by which approval to the appointment of the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 146 of 1953, (Kali Kanta Choudhury) as Mouzadar was withheld and Respondent No. 6, Sarbeswar Patgiri was appointed Mouzadar in his place.

(2.) THE facts bearing on the points that arise for determination in this case are as follows: Kali Kanta Choudhury was a Mauzadar of Kaklabari Mouza in Barpeta Sub -Division. Labhanya Kumar Choudhury who was Mouzadar of Uttar Bajali Mouza was suspended from the office of Mouzadar Kali Kanta Choudhury was ordered to take charge of the collection of the revenue in Uttar Bajali Mouza till the appointment of a permanent Mouzadar could be made. Applications were invited for a permanent appointment. The Deputy Commissioner by his order, dated 8 -3 -1953 decided to appoint Kali Kanta as the, permanent Mouzadar of Uttar, Bajali Mouza. In pursuance of this order, Kali Kanta furnished the security required by the rules. He also executed a Kabuliyat. There were rival claimants for the office of the mouzadar. These claimants four in number appealed to the Revenue Minister of the State. On 10th July, 1953, an order was passed by which the appointment of Kali Kanta as Mouzadar of Uttar Bajali was not; approved. The main reason given for this decision was that the transfer of Kali Kanta from Kaklabari to Uttar Bajali was pot in public interest. Respondent No. 6 was considered to be the most suitable candidate for appointment in his place. This order was communicated to Kali Kanta, the Petitioner on 18th August, 1953.

(3.) ON the date when Kali Kanta was appointed Mouzadar, the Deputy Commissioner's power under the executive instructions was not absolute. He was not the final authority. His powers of appointment had been made subject to the approval of the Government. The order passed by the Deputy Commissioner expressly states that the appointment of Kali Kanta is subject to the approval of the Government. The Deputy Commissioner was not in any doubt as to his powers. Since approval of the appointment from the Government had to be obtained, the case was submitted to Government for necessary approval. There were petitions of appeal addressed to the Government. From the impugned order, it appears that these appeal petitions were read and considered. Reports of the Deputy Commissioner were also taken into consideration and after a consideration of all claims and reports, the decision embodied in the order dated 10th July, 1953 was arrived at.