Page No.# 1/9 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 2 April, 2026

                                                                         Page No.# 1/9
                                                                               2017:GAU-AS:9932
GAHC010166452015




                                                                  2017:GAU-AS:9932

                          THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                              Case No. : WP(C)/3172/2015

           MD. RASHIDUL HOQUE
           S/O MD ABDUL SATTAR R/O VIL- DALANI JURIA, P.O. TINSUKIA
           DIST.NAGAON, ASSAM.



           VERSUS

           THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
           REP.BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
           REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

           2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

           NAGAON
           ASSAM.

           3:THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

           GAONBORA BRANCH
           NAGAON
           DIST. NAGAON
           ASSAM.

           4:MD. NAZRUL ISLAM
            S/O LT. ABDUL BARIK R/O VILL- CHATIAN
            P.O. TINSUKIA
            DIST. NAGAON
           ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S ZAMAN, MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN,MR. M H SAIKIA,R
ALI,MR.F ISLAM,MR.A SHARIF

Advocate for the Respondent : MR.J A AHMEDR-4, SC, REVENUE, DEPTT. (R-1),MR. K M
                                                                       Page No.# 2/9
                                                                            2017:GAU-AS:9932
HASSAN(R4),GA, ASSAM(R1-3),MR.D BARMAN(R-4)




                                    BEFORE
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
                                     ORDER

02.04.2026

Heard Mr. M. H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing counsel, Revenue and Disaster and Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. K. M. Hasan, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to an order dated 30.11.2013, appointing the respondent No.4, as the gaonburah of Dalani-Juria Lat/Kisam under Mauza Juria, Circle, Rupahi Revenue Circle, District, Nagaon, Assam.

3. The projections made in the writ petition, reveals that in pursuance to an advertisement issued on 22.08.2013, applications were invited for filing up of a vacant post of gaonburah of Dalani Juria Lat/Kisam under Mauza Juria. The said post was earlier occupied by one Abdul Mannan, who is the grandfather of the petitioner, herein. The petitioner having fulfilled the eligibility criteria had submitted his application in pursuance to the said advertisement. Thereafter, a selection process was initiated and on conclusion of the said selection process, the respondent authorities vide an order dated 30.11.2013, had proceeded to appoint the respondent No.4, herein, as a Gaonburah of the Lot, which was earlier held by Abdul Mannan. In the order, it was specified that the engagement of the respondent No.4 as Gaonburah was so effected against Page No.# 3/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932 Dalani-Juria Lat/Kisam under Mauza-Juria, earlier held by Abdul Mannan, who had since retired from his service. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said engagement effected in respect of the respondent No.4, has instituted the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset has submitted that the respondent No.4, herein, had not applied in pursuance to the advertisement dated 22.08.2013. He submits that the respondent No. 4 had also not participated in the selection process, however, the respondent authorities had proceeded to engage the respondent No.4, as the gaonburah of the said Lat vide the order dated 30.11.2013. He further projects that the petitioner being a member of the family of an ex-gaonburah, he was entitled to be granted preferential treatment, however, such preferential treatment has not been extended to the petitioner, herein. On a query made by this Court as to the marks scored by the petitioner in the selection process, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the same is not available with him and no contention in this connection has also been raised in the present writ petition.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the said grounds has prayed that the engagement as effected in respect of the respondent No.4, vide the order dated 30.11.2013, would mandate an interference.

6. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, has submitted that in terms of the instructions furnished to her by the Additional District Commissioner, Revenue, Nagaon, it is one Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, resident of Village- Telia Bebejia, P.S.- Juria, Mouza-Juria in the District of Nagaon, who was appointed against the Dalani-Juria Lat, vide an order dated 16.10.2017 and he is presently, working, Page No.# 4/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932 therein and it is not the respondent No.4, who is so working against the said Lat.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent No.4, has submitted that he was engaged as a gaonburah vide the order dated 30.11.2013 and has submitted that in the order such engagement was against the post of a gaonburah earlier held by one Abdul Mannan and the Lat was identified therein as Dalani-Juria Lat. The learned counsel for the respondent No.4, has submitted that after the present writ petition was dismissed for default, vide an order dated 31.08.2017, the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, had vide order dated 16.10.2017, appointed one Nazrul Islam as the gaonburah of Dalani-Juria village. The said Nazrul Islam is the person to whom, reference is made in the instructions received by the Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate. On a query made under which order the respondent No.4 was presently continuing, in the event the engagement effected in his case vide the order dated 30.11.2013 and the engagement in respect of Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, effected by order dated 16.10.2017, is found to be for the same Lat. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 has submitted that the respondent No.4 is working in a different Lat and not against the Lat earlier held by Abdul Mannan.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

9. At the outset, this Court would consider the claims made by the petitioner in the present writ petition. It is a settled position of law that in the event a candidate who has participated in the recruitment process for the post of gaonburah is aggrieved by a engagement made, therein, of another person, he is required to file an appeal before the prescribed Appellate authority. The Page No.# 5/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932 petitioner in the present writ petition is found to have not availed the said remedy however, considering the fact that the present writ petition is pending since the year 2015, on the records of this Court, this Court would not at this stage non-suit the petitioner on the said count.

10. The parties are ad idem that the recruitment process for the post of Gaonburah for Dalani-Juria Lat was initiated vide an advertisement dated 22.08.2013. The said advertisement, which is in vernacular, being relevant, is extracted herein below:-

"ববিজজ্ঞাপন

ৰূপহহ (জজৰহয়জ্ঞা) ৰজ্ঞাজহ চক্রৰ অন্তৰৰ্গত জজৰহয়জ্ঞা মমমৌজজ্ঞাৰ দলনহ জজৰহয়জ্ঞা লজ্ঞার/ৰ্গ

বকিছজ্ঞানতৰ ৰজ্ঞাওওঁবিজঢজ্ঞা মমজ্ঞাম আবজল মনজ্ঞান ৰজ্ঞাওঁওবিজঢজ্ঞা, বপতজ্ঞা মমৃত নজ্ঞায়য়বি আলহয়য় অরসবি

মলজ্ঞাৱজ্ঞাত খজ্ঞাবল মহজ্ঞারজ্ঞা উক লজ্ঞারত বনযজকক মপজ্ঞাৱজ্ঞাৰ বিজ্ঞায়বি সজ্ঞানহয় ইচচকি পজ্ঞারর্থীৰ পৰজ্ঞা আয়বিদন

পত ববিচৰজ্ঞা হহয়ছ। আয়বিদন পত জমজ্ঞা বদয়জ্ঞাবি মশেষ তজ্ঞাবৰখ ৫/৯/২০১৩। বনৰৰ্গজ্ঞাবৰত সময়ৰ

বপচত মকিজ্ঞায়নজ্ঞা আয়বিদন পত গ্রহণ কিৰজ্ঞা নহয়। ইচচকি পজ্ঞারর্থীয়য় আয়বিদন পত জমজ্ঞা বদওওঁয়ত

বিয়সৰ পমজ্ঞাণ পত, বশেকজ্ঞাৰত অহৰ্গতজ্ঞাবি পমজ্ঞাণ পত ইততজ্ঞাবদ ৰজ্ঞাঠঠ বদবি লজ্ঞাবৰবি। আয়বিদনকিজ্ঞাৰহ

উক লজ্ঞারৰ সজ্ঞায়হ বিজ্ঞাবসনজ্ঞা হবি লজ্ঞাবৰবি। এবিজ্ঞাৰ আয়বিদন বদয়জ্ঞা পজ্ঞারর্থীয়য় পপূনবি আয়বিদন বদয়জ্ঞাৰ

আৱশেতকি নজ্ঞাই। আয়বিদন পত সসংবশ্লিষ চক্র ববিষয়জ্ঞাৰ কিজ্ঞাযৰ্গতজ্ঞালয়ত জমজ্ঞা বদবি আৰ চক্র

ববিষয়জ্ঞাই আয়বিদন পত সমপূহ পজ্ঞাবপ সহকিজ্ঞাৰ কিৰজ্ঞাৰ পজ্ঞাচত আয়বিদন পত সমপূহ পৰহকজ্ঞা কিবৰ

সসংবশ্লিষ রজ্ঞানজ্ঞা ও মমমৌজজ্ঞাদজ্ঞাৰৰ পবতয়বিদন সহ ৭ (সজ্ঞাত) বদনৰ বভিতৰত বনম সজ্ঞাকৰকিজ্ঞাৰহৰ

কিজ্ঞাযৰ্গতজ্ঞালয়ত দজ্ঞাবখল কিবৰবি।

Page No.# 6/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932

অবতবৰক উপজ্ঞাযজক,

(ৰজ্ঞাওঁওবিজঢজ্ঞা শেজ্ঞাখজ্ঞা) নৰজ্ঞাওওঁ।

তজ্ঞাসং-২২/৮/২০১৩"

11. Perusal of the said advertisement would reveal that a post of gaonburah of Dalani Juria Lat, under Rupahi Revenue Circle, Rupahi Mouza, falling vacant on account of the earlier gaonburah Abdul Mannan, proceeding on retirement was put up for recruitment and applications were invited from intending candidates. On conclusion of the said selection process, this Court finds that vide an order dated 30.11.2013, the respondent No.4 herein i.e. Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Lt. Abdul Barik, resident of- village-Chatian, P.O.- Tinsukia was so engaged. In the said order it is specified that such engagement is against the post earlier held by Abdul Mannan.

12. The pleadings of the respondent No.4, has brought on record another order of engagement issued in respect of one Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali for the same Lat i.e. Dalani Juria Lat. Admitedly, the said two orders of engagement issued is found to be against the said Lat. There is no clarification in this matter from the respondent authorities in their affidavit rather the said issue has not been dealt with in any manner.

13. At this stage the instructions dated 19.01.2026, received by Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, is to be noticed. The instructions, being relevant is extracted, herein below:-

"With reference to the subject cited above I would like to inform you that WP (C) 3172/2015 pertaining to Nazrul Islam, S/o- Lt. Abdul Barik, R/o- Vill- Chatian, P.O. Tinsukia, Dist-Nagaon (Assam) Gaonburah of Chatian, Nagabandha and Kenduguri under Rupahi Revenue was suspended vide D.C.'s order No. E-

Page No.# 7/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932 446399/46, dated 28.04.2023 and departmental proceeding has been initiated against him & investigation is going on.

Further, as mentioned in your letter under reference the Gaon Pradhan of Lot Dalani Juria is Md. Nazrul Islam, S/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, Vill- Telia Bebejia, PS- Juria, Mouza-Juria in the District of Nagaon who was appointed vide No. NRK.126/2016/33 (Ka), dated 16.10.2017 and he have been working till date."

14. A perusal of the said instructions, would reveal that one Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Lt. Abdul Barik, resident of- village-Chatian, P.O.- Tinsukia District- Nagaon, was engaged as a Gaonburah of Chatian, Nagabandha and Kenduguri under Rupahi Revenue Circle and the person is placed under suspension vide order dated 28.04.2023 and departmental proceedings has also been instituted against him. The said person admittedly is not the respondent No.4, because in the present proceedings no order appointing the respondent No.4, as the Gaonburah of Chatian, Nagabandha and Kenduguri has been placed on record. The only appointment order placed on record, which is also admitted to by the learned counsel for respondent No.4, is the order of engagement dated 30.11.2013, which admittedly is against the Dalani-Juria Lat, which was earlier held by Abdul Mannan. Further, the said instructions also revealed that for Dalani Juria Lat, it is one Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, resident of Village- Telia Bebejia, P.S.- Juria, Mouza-Juria in the District of Nagaon, who has been appointed vide order dated 16.10.2017 and he is working.

15. The facts noticed herein above brings two possibilities:- one, the respondent No.4 was selected for the particular Lat, but was appointed for a different one or in the selection process it is Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, who had submitted his candidature for engagement as the gaonburah of Dalani-Juria Lat. The above situations noticed cannot co-exist together.

Page No.# 8/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932

16. Accordingly, a disputed question of fact has come on record and the same is not permissible to be so resolved by this Court basing solely on the affidavit of the parties.

17. Having drawn the said conclusions, this Court would not examine the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner in the present proceeding has only levelled grave allegations, without, there being any particulars to support such claims. This Court not being in a position to determine the merit position obtained by the petitioner in the selection process and also considering the disputed question of fact coming on record with regard to the appointment effected to against the post of gaonburah advertised vide the advertisement dated 22.08.2013, this Court is of the considered view that the claims made by the petitioner in the present writ petition would not mandate a consideration on merits and accordingly, such claims made stands rejected.

18. With regard to the appointments made in respect of Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Lt. Abdul Barik, resident of- village-Chatian, P.O.- Tinsukia District-Nagaon as the Gaonburah of Chatian, Nagabandha and Kenduguri, as well as the appointment affected as in respect of Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali as the Gaonbuarah of Dalani-Juria Lat, the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon shall conduct an enquiry into the matter after affording an opportunity to both Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Lt. Abdul Barik, who is projected to be engaged as Gaonburah of Chatian, Nagabandha and Kenduguri Lat under Rupahi Revenue Circle and Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali, who is projected to be engaged as Gaonburah of Dalani-Juria Lat and thereafter pass appropriate orders. The Deputy Commissioner during the enquiry shall examine the manner in which the respondent No.4, in the present proceedings was appointed as well Page No.# 9/9 2017:GAU-AS:9932 as procedure followed for engagement of Md. Nazrul Islam, s/o- Md. Muhbub Ali.

19. On conclusion of the enquiry directed hereinabove, the Deputy Commissioner shall pass a speaking order with regard to the determination made by him on the issue noticed by this Court, hereinabove. The Deputy Commissioner on conclusion of the said enquiry shall pass a speaking order and communicate the same to both the Nazrul Islams noticed, hereinabove, along with the decision with regard to their continuation as Gaonburahs against the post to which they were so engaged.

20. The above exercise shall be initiated and concluded by the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order from Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate.

21. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate is requested to download a copy of the present order and forward the same, with due acknowledgment, to the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, for compliance.

22. With the above observation and directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant