JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Govt. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 as well as Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 to 6. 2. This appeal has been filed by the Head Gaon Burah, Darka-III as the appellant No. 1 and one Sh. Pegam Ete as the appellant No. 2, against the judgment & order dated 12.12.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018, by which the writ petition was allowed. wxyz The learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment has set aside the order passed by the village authority Ex-Communicating the respondent Nos. 1 to 4/writ petitioners and their family members from the village Darka-I and Darka-II and imposed exemplary cost of Rs. 20,000/- on the respondent Nos. 5 & 6. zyxw 3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent No. 1 lodged a complaint with the Head Gaon Burahs of Darka-I and Darka-II against the appellant No. 2, on the ground that the appellant No. 2 was encroaching upon the "Guar land" of the respondent No. 1 by excavating the land. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1 apparently re-erected the damaged fencing of the land. As the respondent No. 1 was a Government Servant, posted at Tezu, the respondent No. 1 went back to his place of posting. 4. That the village authorities decided to conduct a Keba on 28.02.2018 and to that effect, a Parwana (Summons) dated 20.02.2018 was issued. The respondent Nol. 1 apparently could not attend the said Keba Meeting. The Keba was again fixed on another date, but due to some other reason, the respondent No. 1 could not attend the said Keba Meeting also. On 09.03.2018, when the respondent No. 1 went to the encroached site, he found that his reerected fencing had been completely destroyed. On enquiry, he came to learn that the reerected fencing had been destroyed by some villagers and the appellant No. 2 at the behest of the village authorities. The respondent No. 1 thereafter sent a letter dated 16.03.2018 through his counsel to the village authorities, stating that they should not press for his presence before the Keba, for settlement of his complaint, as he intended to move the Civil Court with regard to his grievance. 5. Title Suit No. 4/2018 along with Misc. The respondent No. 1 thereafter sent a letter dated 16.03.2018 through his counsel to the village authorities, stating that they should not press for his presence before the Keba, for settlement of his complaint, as he intended to move the Civil Court with regard to his grievance. 5. Title Suit No. 4/2018 along with Misc. Case No. 10/2018 under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC was filed by the respondent No. 1 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aalo. The Court of the Civil Judge thereafter passed a temporary injunction order dated 23.03.2018, restraining the appellant No. 2 from excavating and constructing a road over the land of the respondent No. 1. 6. The village authorities thereafter served another Parwana (Summons) dated 29.03.2018 to the respondent No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 informing them that they should attend the Keba to be held at Darka General Community Hall on 12.04.2018. The respondent Nos. 1 & 2 informed the village authorities that a Civil Suit was already pending with regard to the encroached property and they could not attend the Keba. The respondent Nos. 1 & 2 did not attend the Keba held on 12.04.2018 and an Ex-Parte decision dated 12.04.2018 was passed by the Keba Meeting, wherein it was held that the people of Darka allowed the appellant No. 2 to continue construction of the road and that the road built upon the disputed land did not belong to the respondent No. 1. Subsequent to the above Ex-Parte decision dated 12.04.2018 passed by the Keba, another decision was passed by the Keba on 14.06.2018, with regard to the construction of the road over the disputed land, which held that the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had created problems while constructing the 2 roads from DARKA OMGI to ITBP and DARKA OMGI to YEGGO HYDEL. Accordingly, the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and their families were Ex-Communicated from the Darka community and the villagers were not allowed to have any interaction whatsoever with them. 7. The Ex-Communication of the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, as recorded in the Keba held on 14.06.2018 is reproduced below: wxyz "1. No person of Darka Village is allowed to visit at the residence of Shri Liya Ete, Shri Duge Ete, Shri Liduk Ete and Shri Lee Ete. 7. The Ex-Communication of the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, as recorded in the Keba held on 14.06.2018 is reproduced below: wxyz "1. No person of Darka Village is allowed to visit at the residence of Shri Liya Ete, Shri Duge Ete, Shri Liduk Ete and Shri Lee Ete. The person who violated shall be imposed a fine of one mithun and these four persons and their family members are also not allow to visit other villagers'' house. Any person allows them in their houses will imposed a fine of rupees 5000/- (five thousand) only. This fine will be imposes on every single visit of the mentioned persons. zyxw wxyz 2. Nobody is allow to enter their house even in the case of emergency (LOMNAMGINAM, BEMAR-HAJAR). The local priest and his co-priest of the village will also not visit and help these four person in case of any domestic difficulties. And person who defy the rules will be imposed a fine of one mithun thereto. zyxw wxyz 3. No co-villager is permitted to cultivate the land of any of these four persons on lease basis. However, a person who has cultivated the WRC field in this season is allowed to collect the paddy crops but from the next year they will not cultivate the same land belonging to four persons. They are also instructed not to visit the house. Thus Person whosoever disobey the rules, will impose a fine of one mithun, accordingly. zyxw wxyz 4. Any social and domestic help like material collection of the traditional house, marriage, field cultivations, traditional Puja and other problems shall not be attended by villagers of darka. Defaulter will be imposed a Mithun. zyxw wxyz 5. A person who is engaged by said four persons for looking after their domestic animals like Mithun and Cows (Care-taker) shall surrender to them. And are directed to give up their responsibility within one month. The person who remain care their animal after the said period will be imposed a fine of one mithun, accordingly. However, such care taker shall clear their outstanding charge, if any against them. zyxw wxyz 6. They are also prohibited from participation and membership in community activities like community meeting, Mopin festival, celebration of any other festivals, cultural party, Sector Dere, SHG group and are also debarred from the duty of Daily fire volunteer of the village. However, such care taker shall clear their outstanding charge, if any against them. zyxw wxyz 6. They are also prohibited from participation and membership in community activities like community meeting, Mopin festival, celebration of any other festivals, cultural party, Sector Dere, SHG group and are also debarred from the duty of Daily fire volunteer of the village. A person or party indulged or allowing them will be imposed a fine of one mithun. zyxw wxyz 7. They may be allowed to come in the Dere (Community Hall) when a summon is issued to them if there is situation to do so, otherwise it is restricted. zyxw wxyz 8. The above mentioned four sons of late Mindo Ete and Shri Minli Ete, namely, Shri Liya Ete, Shri Duge Ete, Shri Liduk Ete and Shri Lee Ete, are ceased to be member of any committee, Lube-Lura, Mopin-Moji, Gam-Leader, PRI Leader within the village community not allow to hold any portfolios thereof. zyxw wxyz 9. The violator of the above mentioned points from sl. No. 1 to 8, will also be excommunicated from the Darka Village. zyxw wxyz 10. Therefore today the people of Darka Village ''BAAN'' is hereby ex-communicate zyxw wxyz Shri Liya Ete, Shri Duge Ete, Shri Liduk Ete and Shri Lee Ete, along with their family members from the village community. However, in due course of time if they became cordial and submissive with the co-villagers and show their remorsefulness and begs for re-consideration of the resolution passed against them, the village community will decide whether to consider such prayer." zyxw 8. The respondent Nos. 1 to 4 being aggrieved by their Ex-Communication by the Keba held on 14.06.2018 filed WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018. WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018 was allowed vide Judgment & Order dated 12.12.2019 by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge held that in terms of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945, herein after referred to as AFR, 1945, the village authority were to administer justice in civil proceedings and they could not deviate from the said powers and functions by passing an order, which caused an injustice, in the form of violation of fundamental rights as guaranteed under Article 14& 21 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge held that the order of the Keba made on 14.06.2018, Ex-Communicating the petitioners and their family members from the village Darka-I and Darka-II and further restraining the other villagers, from visiting their houses also amounts to violation of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the order passed in the Keba held on 14.06.2018 was set aside and exemplary cost of Rs. 20,000/- was imposed upon the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 jointly and separately. 9. Being aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge, passed vide Judgment & Order dated 12.12.2019 in WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018, the appellants have filed the present appeal. 10. The appellants counsel submits that the village authority can pass a decision by exercising the powers conferred upon them under Regulation 40 of the AFR, 1945 and if any person was aggrieved by the same, an appeal can be filed to the Assistant Commissioner as per the AFR, 1945. The appellants counsel thus submits that the learned Single Judge should not have entertained the writ petition as there was an alternative remedy available. The appellants counsel also submits that as the appellant No. 1 along with the Gaon Burahs and the villagers had decided to Ex-Communicate the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and their families on the ground indicated in the Keba decision dated 14.06.2018. He also submits that, imposition of exemplary cost upon the Gaon Burahs was arbitrary. Thus, the impugned order of the Single Judge should be set aside. 11. The learned counsels for the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 submit that there is no infirmity with the judgment of the learned Single Judge and the same should be upheld. 12. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 13. On perusal of the parties, as reflected in the Cause Title of the writ appeal, it can be seen that the present appellant No. 1, i.e. Shri Jomgum Padu, Head Gaon Burah, Darka-III was not a party in the proceedings before the learned Single Judge, though he was part of the Keba, which passed the order dated 14.06.2018. Further, the appellant No. 2 is the Contractor, who had built the road. Thus, the appellant No. 1 being an interested party, it is not understood as to how the appellant Nos. 1 & 2 could join together to file the appeal. 14. Further, the appellant No. 2 is the Contractor, who had built the road. Thus, the appellant No. 1 being an interested party, it is not understood as to how the appellant Nos. 1 & 2 could join together to file the appeal. 14. As can be seen from the Keba decision dated 14.06.2018, no person of Darka village is allowed to have any contact whatsoever with the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and their families. The decision made by the Keba on 14.06.2016 is not contemplated under Regulation 40 of the AFR, 1945. In fact, the Keba decision dated 14.06.2018 states as follows: wxyz "Till today, there has been no case of ex-communication in the village. It is the first time, and for that reason, the entire village member debating a very deep and long discussion and came to the conclusion and pronounces this excommunication today." zyxw 15. A perusal of the same shows that the impugned excommunication decision has been made for the first time.As such, the same cannot be said to be a custom or norm within the meaning of customary law of the parties herein. Custom requires that a practice should have been practiced from time immemorial. It should also to be in continued practice and have the force of law. However, the very wording given in the Keba decision dated 14.06.2018 shows that the ex-communication has not been practiced and it cannot have a force of law, as it would be violative of Part-III of the Constitution of India. It is also not a decision that can be made under the AFR, 1945. As statutory laws do not provide for ex-communication also, we find that the Keba decision is not sustainable in law. 16. In the case of Harbanslal Sahnai v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Others, (2003) 2 SCC 107 , the Apex Court has held that in an appropriate case, in spite of availability of alternative remedy, the High Court may still exercise its writ jurisdiction in at least 3 cases:- wxyz 1) where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any fundamental right. zyxw wxyz 2) where there is failure of the principles of natural justice or zyxw wxyz 3) where the orders of proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged. zyxw 17. zyxw wxyz 2) where there is failure of the principles of natural justice or zyxw wxyz 3) where the orders of proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged. zyxw 17. In the present case, the writ petition having been filed for enforcement of a fundamental right and as the order of the Keba is not justified under the AFR, 1945 or under the Constitution of India, we do not find any infirmity with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 18. Accordingly, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned Judgment of the learned Single Judge, in so far as the Keba order dated 14.06.2016 has been set aside. Though the appellants counsel has also prayed for setting aside the cost imposed upon the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 in the writ petition, as the decision was made by all the villagers and other Gaon Burahs, we find that the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 in the writ petition are not before us. However, as the Keba decision was made by the villagers and the other Gaon Burahs along with the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 in the writ petition, we deem it appropriate that the cost of Rs. 20,000/- imposed, should be reduced to Rs. 5,000/-. Accordingly, the cost of Rs. 5,000/- should be deposited by the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 in the writ petition in the Registry of this Court, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Consequently, the impugned Judgment dated 12.12.2019 passed in WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018 is modified to the extent indicated above. wxyz Writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. zyxw