Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- T N K SINGH
Outcome
Allowed
The writ petition is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
Borsila Weekly Market was settled with the petitioner f or the term 2007 June to 2008 July which will end on 30th June, 2008 for the bid of Rs. 4, 70, 349/- (Rupees Four Lakhs seventy thousand three hundred and fourt y nine ) only. It is alleged in the writ petition that because of unavoidable in cidents , such as, frequent bandhs, floods and attacks by the Naga extremist the petitioner had suffered heavy loss in collection of the revenue/rent for the sa id market . Ms. E. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner also c ontends that there are provisions under the Assam Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and al so the Assam Panchayat(Financial) Rule 2008 for considering the case of the peti tioner for remission as well as extension of the term for settlement of the said market taking into consideration of the heavy loss suffered by the petitioner f or the reasons indicted above. It is also stated that the petitioner had approac hed the President of Sibsagar Zilla Parishad, Sibsagar by filing a representatio n dated 25.4.08 for extension of the settlement/resettlement of the said Borsil a Weekly Market for the period 2008-2009 , so as to enable the petitioner to ma ke good the lossess. It is also stated that the said representation dated 25.4.08 is pending with the President of Sibsagar Zilla Parishad, Sibsagar. In the above factual background, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the President of Sibsagar Zilla Parishad, Sibsagar to consider a nd dispose of the said representation dated 25.4.08 filed by the petitioner by p assing a reasoned order within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The writ petition is allowed.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Assam Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.