Can an Appointment of a Village Development Board Secretary Be Quashed for Improper Disqualification under the Village Development Boards Model Rules, 1980?

Clarifying that Secretaries Must Be Elected Only from a Properly Constituted Management Committee and Quashing Appointments That Violate Rule 5 and Rule 7

 

Summary

Category Data
Case Name WP(C)/154/2024 of SHRI R. THUNGARHOMO LOTHA @ THUNGARHOMO TUNGU Vs THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS
CNR GAHC020004432024
Decision Date 02-09-2025
Disposal Nature Disposed Of
Judgment Author HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Concurring or Dissenting Judges — (Single‐Judge Bench)
Court Gauhati High Court (Kohima Bench)
Bench Single Judge
Precedent Value Binding (within jurisdiction of Gauhati High Court)
Overrules / Affirms Affirms proper application of Village Development Boards Model Rules, 1980
Type of Law Administrative Law / Local Self‐Governance
Questions of Law
  • Whether an appointment of the VDB Secretary is void where disqualification of members violated the Model Rules
  • Whether a fresh selection is then mandatory
Ratio Decidendi

The Secretary of a Village Development Board must be chosen by and from the properly constituted Management Committee (Rule 7).

Any resolution disqualifying members must comply with Rule 5, and improper disqualification vitiates the selection process.

When a material defect is found (via official report), fresh election among all valid members is mandatory.

Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court Interpretation of Village Development Boards Model Rules, 1980 (Revised)
Facts as Summarised by the Court The petitioner and three others were disqualified by village resolution; a report by the Extra Assistant Commissioner found the disqualifications improper; no fresh election was held; respondent 5 was appointed contrary to Rule 7.
Citations
  • GAHC020004432024
  • 2025:GAU-NL:422

Practical Impact

Category Impact
Binding On Deputy Commissioners and Village Development Board authorities within the Gauhati High Court jurisdiction

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

  • Rule 7 mandates selection of the VDB Secretary only from among Management Committee members with no external appointments.
  • Any disqualification under Rule 5 requires recorded reasons and approval; failure to follow renders the selection void.
  • When an official inquiry (EAC report) finds improper disqualification, authorities must hold a fresh selection involving all validly qualified members.
  • Interim Secretaries may be appointed by the ex-officio Chairman pending fresh election.
  • This judgment can be cited to challenge VDB appointments made in breach of the Model Rules.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

  1. The Court examined the Village Development Boards Model Rules, 1980 (Revised):
    • Rule 4(b): Management Committee composition and selection by Village Council.
    • Rule 5: Conditions for replacement/disqualification of Committee members (resolution, recorded reasons, approval).
    • Rule 7: Secretary must be literate, matriculate or above, and selected from among Committee members only.
  2. The meeting on 12.12.2023 disqualified the petitioner and three others without valid compliance with Rule 5, reducing eligible voters.
  3. Extra Assistant Commissioner’s report (26.02.2024) held these disqualifications improper, restoring membership of four.
  4. No fresh election occurred; respondent 5 was appointed by the truncated Committee, contravening Rule 7.
  5. The Court quashed the appointment and directed a fresh selection within one month, with liberty for interim appointment by the Deputy Commissioner (ex-officio Chairman).

Factual Background

The petitioner and three others were invalidly disqualified from the Phiro Village Development Board Management Committee under a Village Council resolution on 12.12.2023. Despite an Extra Assistant Commissioner’s report (26.02.2024) declaring those disqualifications improper and restoring four members, no fresh election for Secretary was held. Instead, respondent 5 was appointed Secretary by the reduced Committee, prompting the petitioner’s writ challenge.

Statutory Analysis

  • Rule 4(a): Establishes General Body of all permanent residents.
  • Rule 4(b): Entrusts Board management to a Committee chosen by Village Council, three‐year tenure.
  • Rule 5: Permits replacement/disqualification by Village Council resolution with recorded reasons and Chairman’s approval.
  • Rule 7: Requires Secretary to be selected exclusively from Committee members, with minimum matriculation, and prohibits certain office-holders from holding the post.

Alert Indicators

  • ✔ Precedent Followed

Citations

  • Gauhati High Court: GAHC020004432024; 2025:GAU-NL:422
  • Paras. 6–10 (interpretation of Rules), Paras. 11(i)–(ii) (directions)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Comments

No comments to show.