Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010092972019 2025:GAU-AS:1105 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2875/2019 ARUP DAS SARANIA S/O. LT. MANGAL DAS SARANIA, PERMANENT ADDRESS OF VILL. KALAKUCHI, P.S. TAMULPUR, DIST. BAKSA (BTAD), ASSAM-781367, PRESENT ADDRESS- VILL. NARENGI- SATGAON, P.O. UDAYAN BIHAR, P.S. NOONMATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781171. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF REVENUE, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-781032. 4:THE SECRETARY THE DEPTT. OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT BOROLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) BODOLAND KOKRAJHAR ASSAM-783370. 5:THE JOINT SECRETARY DEPTT. OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT BOROLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) BODOLAND Page No.# 2/4 KOKRAJHAR ASSAM-783370. 6:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM-783370. 7:THE CENTRAL SELECTION BOARD REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM-783370. 8:THE MEMBER SECRETARY THE CENTRAL SELECTION BOARD BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM-783370 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K PURKAYASTHA, MR. S K DAS,MR. S SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, BTC, SC, REVENUE,SC, DLR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 04.02.2025 Heard Mr. A.K. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R.B Borah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 6 and Mr. J Handique, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 3. The present writ petition is filed challenging the validity of selection process as well as the consequent appointment to the Page No.# 3/4 post of Lot Mondal under Land Revenue Department, BTC. The said selection process was initiated by an advertisement dated 09.01.2019. The ground of challenge of the validity of the selection process as well as the resultant appointment made to the selected candidates is that the respondent authorities had totally failed to conduct the selection on a fair reasonable and just manner. The entire process of selection and appointments were hit by vice of favoritism, biasness, undue preference etc. It is an admitted position that at paragraph No.3, the petitioner pleaded that they undertake to implead those candidates who appeared in the selection test interview held on 27.02.2019, in the event this court directs or desires in such a case. It is an admitted position that already selected candidates were appointed way back in the year 2019. Beyond the allegations being vague, this court is of the opinion that the selected candidates are having a valuable right of being heard in this writ petition inasmuch as, in the event the writ petition is allowed, their valuable right shall be affected, however, the petitioner has not impleaded the said appointees in the writ petition nor they had made any endeavor to collect their names which is easily available and could have been done taking recourse to provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005. Be that as it may, this writ petition was filed in the year 2019 and till date the appointed candidates are not before us. In view of the aforesaid, this court is of the opinion that Page No.# 4/4 this writ petition should be dismissed for want of necessary parties inasmuch as, no direction is required to implead, when the petitioners are themselves aware that selected candidates are necessary parties as reflected at para 3 of the writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition impleading the appointed candidates. JUDGE Comparing Assistant