Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010109822021 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3759/2021 RAJU SAIKIA SON OF SHRI MINARAM SAIKIA R/O VILL- MUDAIGAON, P.O.MAJULI BONGAON, P.S. MAJULI DIST. MAJULI, ASSAM PIN-785110 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP.BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-781032 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT- MAJULI ASSAM PIN-785110 5:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL) Page No.# 2/4 MAJULI DISTRICT- MAJULI ASSAM 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MAJULI REVENUE CIRCLE MAJULI DIST. MAJULI ASSAM PIN-78511 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K PURKAYASTHA, MR. M K MAJUMDAR,MR. S SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 02-09-2026 None appears for the petitioner on call. Heard Mr. J. Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 4 to 6. 2. Respondents have also not filed any affidavit in the matter. Accordingly, in terms of the direction passed by this Court vide order dated 24-07-2026, this Court proceeds to consider the issue arising in the present writ petition, basing on the materials available on record. 3. The petitioner in the present writ petition, has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities, for consideration of his case, for appointment as Khalasi, in the Page No.# 3/4 establishment of the respondent No. 4, i.e. the District Commissioner, Majuli. The petitioner in the present writ petition, has projected that he is the son of Minaram Saikia, who was working as Lat Mandal and had retired from his services on 31-05-2002, on reaching the age of superannuation. It is seen that, thereafter, the petitioner had approached the respondent authorities, praying for consideration of his case, for engagement as Khalasi and also for deputing him to undergo Recorders’ Certificate Class Course (RCCC). 4. The prayers made by the petitioner, not being considered by the respondent authorities, the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition. 5. From the reliefs prayed for in the present writ petition, this Court finds that the only relief sought for by the petitioner, is for a direction upon the respondent authorities, for consideration of his case for appointment as Khalasi and no other relief has been sought for, in the present writ petition. 6. The petitioner in the writ petition, has projected that there is no rule governing recruitment of Khalasi and the petitioner having submitted a due application before the respondent authority, the respondent authorities were duty bound to consider the same, in accordance with the procedure mandated. 7. Although an affidavit has not been filed in the matter, Mr. J. Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department submits that the application of the petitioner, would be permissible to be so considered only in the event, a process of recruitment to the post of Khalasi, is undertaken and the petitioner is found to have satisfied the Page No.# 4/4 requisite eligibility criteria, as prescribed for recruitment against the said post. 8. In view of the above position, while no direction can be issued to the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner as Khalasi, basing on the materials brought on record in the present writ petition, this Court provides that in the event, a process of recruitment is so initiated for filling up a vacant post of Khalasi in the establishment of the respondent No. 4, the petitioner would be entitled to apply against the same and in the event, the petitioner fulfills the requisite eligibility criteria including the criteria for upper age limit, so prescribed, the case of the petitioner be considered for appointment as Khalasi along with other similarly situated persons who would also submit their respective applications, in the process of recruitment so initiated. In view of the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant