Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/12 vs The State Of Assam And 33 Ors on 29 July, 2022
Author: Michael Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/12
GAHC010007242021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/378/2021
ABDUL MATLIB LASKAR AND 5 ORS.
S/O- ASADDAR ALI LASKAR, R/O- GOBINDAPUR, P.O. GOBINDAPUR, P.S.
SILCHAR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM
2: AMINUL ISLAM MAJUMDAR
S/O- LT. FARID ALI MAJUMDAR
R/O- VILL- SIBPUR PART-II
P.O. HAZARIGRAM BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
3: UTTAM KUMAR NATH
S/O- LT. ABANTI MOHAN NATH
R/O- VILL- MOHANPUR
P.O. KATIRAIL
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
4: SULTAN AHMED LASKAR
S/O- LT. KHALILUDDIN LASKAR
R/O- DAKHIN MOHANPUR PART-VII
P.O. SWADIN BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
5: KSH. DHARMENDRA SINGHA
S/O- LT. KSH. JUGENDRA SINGHA
R/O- KAZIDAR PART-II
P.O. AND P.S. SONAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
6: JAKIR HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- SUNAHAR ALI BARBHUIYA
Page No.# 2/12
R/O- VILL- CHANGURTOL
P.O. SONAIMUKH
P.S. SONAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 33 ORS.
TO BE REP. BY THE SECY. LAND AND REVENUE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ETC.
ASSAMM
RUPNAGAR
GHY-32
3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
CACHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788001
4:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER
CACHAR AND HAILAKANDI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788001
5:AFIA PARVEEN LASKAR
D/O- LT. AFTAB UDDIN LASKAR
WATER WORKS ROAD
SILCHAR-I
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788001
6:ABDULLA AL FARUK MAZUMDER
S/O- BABUL MAZMDER
VILL- TULARGRAM PT-I
P.O. SONAIMUKH
P.S. SANAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788119
7:JABAD HASSAN LASKAR
S/O- NOIMUL ISLAM LASKAR
VILL- BATIGHAT
Page No.# 3/12
P.O. ARUNACHAL
DIST.- CACAHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788025
8:AMIT NATH
S/O- NRIPENDRA NATH
VILL AND P.O. CHANDPUR PT-III
P.S. BORKHOLA
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788110
9:ZABIR AHEMD BARBHUIYA
S/O- HARISH UDDIN BARBHUIYA
VILL- TUNDRKANDI
P.O. SONAIMUKH
P.S. SONAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788119
10:ANKIT SINHA
S/O- LAKHI BABU SINHA
VILL- SALCHAPRA PT-III
P.O. SALCHAPRA
P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788801
11:AMZAD HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- FORIZ UDDIN BARBHUIYA
VILL- CHANDIPUR PT-III
P.O. KALIBARI BAZAR
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788150
12:NURUL ALOM LASKAR
S/O- HUSSAIN AHMED LASKAR
VILL- GANIRGRAM PT-I
P.O. GANIRGRAM-II
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788025
13:ANUPAM SINHA
Page No.# 4/12
S/O- SUSHIL KUMAR SINHA
VILL AND P.O. BHUBNESWAR NAGAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788817
14:AHSANUL HOQUE LASKAR
S/O- LT. ABDUL MATIN LASKAR
VILL. AND P.O. EAST GOBINDAPUR PT-III
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788101
15:UTPAL KUMAR NATH
S/O- UTTAM KUMAR NATH
VILL- DUDHPATIL PT-V
P.O. DUDHPATIL
P.S. MALUGRAM
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788003
16:RAJDEEP SINHA
S/O- LT. FULBABU SINHA
VILL AND P.O. SINGARI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788007
17:L. BIMAL KUMAR SINGHA
S/O- NILMANJ SINGHA
VILL- BOALJUR
P.O. SINGARI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788007
18:ZAKIR HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- ABDUR RASHID BARBHUIYA
VILL AND P.O. BARJATRAPUR
P.S. BORKHOLA
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788110
19:PARBEZ AHMED LASKAR
S/O- ANWAR AHMED LASKAR
VILL- KANAKPUR PT-II
Page No.# 5/12
P.O. KANAKPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788005
20:SANDEEP BARMAN
S/O- LT. NIHAR BARMAN
VILL- NANTUGRAM
P.O. DHOLOI BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM PIN- 788441
21:ALI HUSSAIN LASKAR
S/O- JOYNAL HOQUE LASKAR
VILL- BAGPUR PT-II
P.O. BAGPUR
P.S. SILCHAR (SADAR)
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788101
22:ABU ANSAR MOZUMDER
S/O- RAIS UDDIN MAZUMDER
VILL- NOORNAGAR
P.O. KATIRAIL
P.S. KATIGORAH
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788804
23:ABDUL SAHID LASKAR
S/O- NAZIR UDDIN LASKAR
VILL- RONGPUR PT-IV
P.O. RONGPUR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788009
24:RONI NATH
S/O- PRONOY NATH
VILL- CHIBITA BICHIA PT-VI
P.O. CHIBITA BICHIA
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788150
25:ABHISHEEK ROY
Page No.# 6/12
S/O- PARIMAL ROY
VILL- RANGIRKHARI
SWARUPANANDA SARANI
SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788005
26:DIPANKAR NATH
S/O- DILIP KUMAR NATH
PALLYAN LANE E AND D COLONY NEAR PRANABONANDA VIDYA
MANDIR
TARAPUR
SILCHAR
P.O. TARAPUR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788003
27:KAISAR JAHAN BARNHUIYA
S/O- KAMRUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA
NEARGRAM PT-II
P.S. SILCHAR (SADAR)
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788013
28:IMRAN HUSSAIN LASKAR
S/O- RAHUL HAUQUE LASKAR
VILL- RONGPUR PT-III
MADURGRAM
P.O. RONGPUR PT-II
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788009
29:AKRAMUL ISLAM LASKAR
S/O- NAZRUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA
VILL- NEARIGRAM PT-I
P.O. NEARIGRAM PT-II
P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788013
30:RAJIB SINHA
S/O- SANJAY KUMAR SINHA
VILL- MONIPUR PT-I
Page No.# 7/12
P.O. KALAIN
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788815
31:UTTAM DEB ROY
S/O- JATINDRA DEB ROY
VILL- GUNONNYEE ROAD TARAPUR SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788003
32:LIPI DEB ROY
D/O- JATINDRA DEB ROY
VILL- GUNONNYEE ROAD TARAPUR SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788003
33:SHAMIM AHMED CHOUDHURY
S/O- JAMIR UDDIN CHOUDHURY
VILL- LAKSHIRBAND
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN- 788155
34:RAHUL MANDAL
S/O- RAM MANDAL
VILL- SAIDPUR PT-VI
SONABARIGHAT
DIST.- CHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 78801
Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. B AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE
Linked Case : WP(C)/115/2021
ABDUL MATLIB LASKAR AND 5 ORS
S/O- ASADDAR ALI LASKAR
R/O- GOBINDAPUR
Page No.# 8/12
P.O. GOBINDAPUR
P.S. SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
2: AMINUL ISLAM MAJUMDAR
S/O- LT. FARID ALI MAJUMDAR
R/O- VILL- SIBPUR PART-II
P.O. HAZARIGRAM BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
3: UTTAM KUMAR NATH
S/O- LT. ABANTI MOHAN NATH
R/O- VILL- MOHANPUR
P.O. KATIRAIL
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
4: SULTAN AHMED LASKAR
S/O- LT. KHALILUDDIN LASKAR
R/O- DAKHIN MOHANPUR PART-VII
P.O. SWADIN BAZAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
5: KSH. DHARMENDRA SINGHA
S/O- LT. KSH. JUGENDRA SINGHA
R/O- KAZIDAR PART-II
P.O. AND P.S. SONAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
6: JAKIR HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA
S/O- SUNAHAR ALI BARBHUIYA
R/O- VILL- CHANGURTOL
P.O. SONAIMUKH
P.S. SONAI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
TO BE REP. BY THE SECY. LAND AND REVENUE DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-6
2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ETC.
Page No.# 9/12
ASSAM
RUPNAGAR
GHY-32
3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
CACHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788001
4:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER
CACHAR AND HAILAKANDI
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788001
------------
Advocate for : DR. B AHMED
Advocate for : GA
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
29.07.2022 Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.D. Purkayashtha, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 to 20 & 22 to
34. Mr. R. Borpujari, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4 and Mr. C.S. Hazarika, learned counsel appears for the respondent No. 3.
2. The petitioners case is that the Advertisement dated 16.03.2020 for appointment of Additional Patwaries, required a candidate to have the maximum age limit of 38 years as on 01.01.2020. The petitioners, who were overage, could not participate in the selection process. Accordingly, the petitioners filed WP(C) No. 5231/2020 praying for relaxation of their overage. This Court disposed of WP(C) No. 5231/2020, vide order dated 19.12.2020, by directing the Director of Land Records & Survey etc, Assam to give consideration to the representation of the petitioners where they requested relaxation of their overage, having regard to the Government notification dated 03.05.1951. This Court further held that depending upon the outcome of the Page No.# 10/12 consideration and in the event the petitioners overage was condoned, necessary steps were to be taken by the respondents for conducting written test, confined to the petitioners herein, following the advertisement dated 16.03.2020.
3. Subsequent to the order dated 09.12.2020 passed in WP(C) No. 5231/2020, the Director, Land Records & Survey etc, Assam issued a detailed order dated 30.12.2020 wherein, it rejected the prayer of the petitioners for relaxation of their overage.
4. Thereafter, the State respondents issued notification dated 05.01.2021, showing the final results of the selection process and the select list of the candidates for appointment to the posts of additional Patwaries, wherein the names of the private respondents were included. Consequently, the State respondents issued the appointment order dated 07.01.2021, appointing the private respondents as additional Patwaries.
5. The petitioners counsel submits that rejection of the petitioners application for relaxation of their overage by the Director has not taken into consideration the object of the Govt. Notification dated 03.05.1951 and the order passed in WP(C) No. 5231/2020 and as such, the said order should be set aside. He also prays for setting aside the notification dated 05.01.2021 and the appointment order dated 07.01.2021 of the private respondents.
6. Mr. S.D. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the Director has given a detailed 7 page order, giving detailed reasons for rejecting the petitioners application for relaxation of their overage. He also submits that the decision of the Director can be interfered with, only if some legal rights of the petitioners have been violated. However, as no legal rights of the petitioners have been violated, the writ petition should be dismissed. He further submits that the petitioners have not challenged the appointment orders dated 12.01.2021 and 21.01.2021, appointing another 10 additional Patwaries in pursuance to the advertisement dated 16.03.2020. As such, unless the petitioners implead the 10 other persons mentioned in the above 2 orders dated Page No.# 11/12 12.01.2021 and 21.01.2021, the writ petition should not be allowed.
7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
8. On a perusal of the impugned order dated 30.12.2020 issued by the Director, made in compliance with the order dated 19.12.2020 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 5231/2021, this Court finds that detailed reasons have been given for rejecting the petitioners application for relaxation of their overage. Some of the reasons for rejection of the petitioners application for relaxation of overage is reproduced below, by reproducing extracts of the impugned order dated 30.12.2020 issued by the Director, which is as follows:
"The candidates at Sl No. 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 & 11 belong to General category and they have exceeded the upper age limit of 38 years by 9 years 5 months, 10 years, 5 years 6 months, 8 years 8 months, 10 year 2 months & 9 years 10 months respectively.
Whereas the candidates at Sl. No. 3, 5, 7, 8 & 10 belong to OBC category and even after applying 3 (three) years relaxation permissible to the OBC candidates, they have exceeded the relaxed age of 41 years by 7 years 8 months 4 days, 3 years 10 months, 3 years 9 months, 10 years 11 months 21 days and 5 years 1 month respectively.
............................................................................................ It is also evident from the materials available on records that the petitioners had earlier applied and appeared in the interview for appointment to the posts of Addl. Patwary on two occasions, but could not be successful failing to secure position to get appointment as it is apparent from the statements made in the writ petitions in W.P. (C) No. 4581/2020 and WP (C) No. 2114/2020. Apart from the Cachar district there was advertisement for appointment of Addl. Patwary in other districts too. It is apparent from their applications that none of them were engaged in any Occupation under the Government of Assam, even on temporary basis. It is also not the case that earlier they did not get any opportunity to apply Page No.# 12/12 for not issuing any advertisement by the department. Further, passing of Recorders Certificate Class Course Training from the Assam Survey and Settlement Training Centre, Dakhirigaon Guwahati, is the essential qualification for appointment to the post of Addl. Patwary. It is a Govt. Training Institute which imparts training on survey and records, like imparting any specialized/professional/technical education by any Govt. specialized/professional/technical institutes. The aspiring candidates are selected through entrance examination. Thus, passing of training does not create any indefeasible right for appointment. Merely for the reason that the petitioners have undergone training, they are not necessarily appointed. Therefore, in my considered opinion any relaxation of age to the above named candidates is not necessary in public interest too. Further, there is no case of any unfair dealing in respect of the applicant writ petition."
9. In view of the fact that the Director has given reasons while rejecting the prayer of the petitioners for relaxation of their overage, this Court does not find any reason to substitute the views made by the Director. Also, this Court does not find the impugned order dated 30.12.2020 to be in cross-roads with the Govt. Notification dated 03.05.1951. Further, there is nothing to show that any legal rights of the petitioners have been violated, vide the impugned order dated 30.12.2020. Also, if this writ petition is allowed, the 10 additional Patwaris appointed vide orders dated 12.01.2021 and 21.01.2021 would be condemned unheard, as they are not parties in this writ petition. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the decision made should not be interfered with. As this Court does not find any ground to allow the writ petition, the writ petition stands dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant