Shahadat Hussain Mollah vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors on 19 February, 2026

                                                                    Page No.# 1/9

GAHC010050812024




                                                             undefined

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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/1417/2024

         SHAHADAT HUSSAIN MOLLAH
         S/O- ABDUS SALAM MOLLAH, VILL- PUB- KATHURI, P.O. TAKIMARI, P.S.
         LAKHIPUR, DIST.- GOALPARA, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
         THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR,
         GUWAHATI- 781006

         2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI- 781006

         3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMINISTRATION)
         ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GHY-7

         4:THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF VILLAGE DEFENCE ORGANIZATION
         ASSAM
          REHABARI
          GHY-8

         5:THE CHIEF ADVISER OF VILLAGE DEFENCE ORGANIZATION
         ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GHY-7

         6:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (W/R)
         ASSAM
                                                                      Page No.# 2/9

             BONGAIGAON

            7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CUM DISTRICT VILLAGE DEFENCE
            OFFICER
             GOALPARA
             DISTRICT- GOALPARA
            ASSAM

            8:SRI GAUTAM DAS
             S/O- LATE BANGESWAR DAS
             HOUSE NO. 377GA
             P.S. DHUPDHARA
             DIST.- GOALPARA
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78313

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR M H AHMED, I AMIN,MR. O ULLAH

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR A CHAKRABORTY,MS. M BHATTACHARJEE




             Linked Case : WP(C)/7346/2023

            SHAHADAT HUSSAIN MOLLAH
            S/O- ABDUS SALAM MOLLAH

            VILL- PUB- KATHURI
            P.O.- TAKIMARI

            P.S.- LAKHIPUR

            DIST.- GOALPARA
            ASSAM.


             VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
            THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

            DISPUR
            GUWAHATI- 781006.

            2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
                                                       Page No.# 3/9

HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006.

3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMINISTRATION)
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GHY-7.

4:THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF VILLAGE DEFENCE ORGANISATION
ASSAM
REHABARI
GHY-8.

5:THE CHIEF ADVISOR OF VILLAGE DEFENCE ORGANISATION
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GHY-7.

6:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (W/R)
ASSAM
BONGAIGAON.

7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CUM DISTRICT VILLAGE DEFENCE
OFFICER
GOALPARA
DISTRICT- GOALPARA
ASSAM.
------------
Advocate for : MR M H AHMED
Advocate for : GA
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
                                                                           Page No.# 4/9


                                 BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

                                      ORDER

Date : 19.02.2026

Heard Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the State Respondents.

2. The petitioner by way of instituting WP(C).No. 7346/2023 had prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara District. The petitioner, thereafter, by way of instituting WP(C). No.1417/2024 has assailed the appointment of the respondent no.8, therein, as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara District.

3. As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner having met the requisite eligibility criteria for being appointed as a Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara District, had submitted an application for the purpose before the competent authority. The said application submitted by the petitioner was processed by the authorities and vide a communication dated 10.02.2021, Government in the Home (A) Department, required the Chief Controller of Village Defence Organization, Assam, to submit a formal proposal in this respect. It is seen that the Chief Controller of Village Defence Organization, Assam, vide communication dated 22.02.2021, submitted a formal proposal for appointment of the petitioner as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. The said proposal was thereafter forwarded to the Government of Assam in the Home (A) Department. The said Page No.# 5/9

proposal as furnished in respect of the petitioner to the Government of the Assam, however was not taken to its logical conclusion. The petitioner thereafter in the year 2022 submitted a fresh application for consideration of his case for appointment as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. On receipt of the said application the Government in the Home(A) Department vide communication dated 03.03.2022, proceeded to require the concerned authorities to process the said application and take appropriate necessary steps at their end as per the existing Government Rules.

It is seen that, thereafter, the concerned authorities had submitted a fresh proposal for the appointment of the petitioner as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. The said exercise having been carried out and the matter on being forwarded to the Government in the Home (political department), same being not taken to its logical conclusion, the petitioner approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.7346/2023. The respondents entered appearance in the said proceedings, and filed affidavits. From the affidavits filed it was revealed that the respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024, was already appointed as the Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara, vide a notification dated 16.12.2023.

Being aggrieved the petitioner has instituted WP(C).No.1417/2024, assailing the said appointment effected in case of the respondent no.8.

4. Mr. M. H. Ahmed, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner after reiterating the facts noticed, hereinabove, has placed reliance on a RTI reply received from the Office of the Chief Controller, Village Defence Organization, Assam, and has highlighted that a perusal of the said RTI Page No.# 6/9

reply would go to reveal that there was no proposal sent from the Office of the Chief Controller, Village Defence Organization, Assam, in respect of the respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024. He accordingly submits that the Government in the Home (A) Department without there being a due proposal being furnished before it with all requisite particulars of the respondent no.8 including the verification of his background, could not have proceeded to consider the case of the respondent no.8 for appointment as the Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. He submits that in respect of the petitioner on 2 (two) occasions, there were proposals submitted before the Government and the same was so done by following the procedure prescribed and after a background verification of the petitioner, wherein, it was found that he had met all the mandated parameters for engagement as Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. He submits that considering the manner in which the respondent no.8 was so engaged against the post, in question, and the same having been demonstrated to have been so done without following the due processes as mandated in the matter, this Court would be pleased to interfere with the said engagement made in respect of the respondent no.8 and direct the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner against the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara, by taking the proposal as submitted before the Government in this connection in his respect to its logical conclusion.

5. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, has submitted that the contention of the petitioner that there was no proposal put up in respect of the respondent no.8 is clearly perverse, inasmuch as, from the affidavit filed by the respondent no.7 i.e., Senior Superintendent of Police in Page No.# 7/9

WP(C).No.7346/2023, it is clear that there was a due proposal submitted in respect of the respondent no.8 (Gautam Das) in year 2018. She submits that the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, is of strategic importance and accordingly, the appointments against the same are made by the Government in the Home (A) Department after a thorough verification of the proposal submitted before it of various persons. She submits that in addition to the proposal pending before the Government in respect of the petitioner and said Gautam Das (respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024), another proposal pertaining to one Dr Anup Kr. Roy, was also forwarded for the same purpose by the District authorities. She submits that given the nature of the engagement involved and the necessity of having a suitable person to man the said post, the discretion exercised by the Government in this connection while deciding to engage the respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024, against the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara, would not mandate an interference from this Court.

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

7. At the outset it is to be noted that the parties to the proceeding has submitted before this Court that there is no set out procedure for engagement against the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. Accordingly, the said appointment is contended to be made after proposals in this connection with the details about the background check of the applicants, done by the competent authorities in the District level is so forwarded to the Government in the Home (A) Department. This Court finds that the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara, is considered to be a very responsible and sensitive post and the person so engaged has to actively Page No.# 8/9

participate in several activities pertaining to crime control, providing supervision and guidance to the Village Defence Organization at the District level. It is contended at the Bar that such appointments are made by the Government after discussions about the suitability of the persons in the fray at various levels and it is only on a proper appreciation of the suitability of the person concerned that such appointments are effected. For the purpose of the selection of the person involved, parameters were set out in a communication dated 20.05.2015. However, the said parameters as set out is not found to have any statutory backing and are for the purpose of guidance only.

8. Having noticed the said position, this Court finds that the petitioner's case, herein, was forwarded to the Government on 2 (two) occasions, first in the year 2021 and thereafter in the year 2022-2023. Along with the proposal for the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara, for the said post it is evident from the materials coming on record that in addition to the name of the petitioner so forwarded, the name of the respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024, Gautam Das and one Dr. Anup Kumar Ray was also pending consideration before the respondent authorities. The Government in the Home (A) Department upon consideration of the said proposals had decided to engage Gautam Das (respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024) as the Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara.

9. This Court finds that a due proposal in respect of said Gautam Das was also available in the records of the Home (A) Department. The authorities of the Home (A) Department, on a due consideration having found the respondent no.8 in WP(C).No.1417/2024 to be the suitable person to man the post of Hony. Deputy Advisor for Village Defence Organization, Goalpara. Such exercise of discretion vested in the Page No.# 9/9

Government, in absence of any malafide being alleged with regard to such selection made by the Government in the Home (A) Department and/or such selection not being demonstrated to have been so made in violation of any statutory provision; the appointment being honorary in nature, this Court is not in a position to accept the contentions raised by the petitioner in the matter.

10. In view of the above position, this Court is of the considered view that the claim made by the petitioner in the above noted 2 (two) writ petitions would not mandate an acceptance. Accordingly, the writ petitions are held to be devoid of any merit and the same stand dismissed. However there would be no order as to costs.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant