Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010247712023 2025:GAU-AS:9200-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6460/2023 MUSTAFA AHMED LASKAR S/O MOZAHID ALI LASKAR, VILL-RONGPUR PART-IV, P.O.-RONGPUR, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST-CACHAR (ASSAM) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND JUSTICE, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL PANBAZAR GUWAHATI-01 3:THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT CACHAR SILCHAR PIN-788001 4:THE SELECTION COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED FOR SELECTION TO THE POST OF PEON IN TERMS OF ADVERTISEMENT DATED 01.03.2023 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN C/O THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT CACHAR SILCHAR PIN-788001 5:LUNGCHUILONG KAMEI Page No.# 2/4 S/O LATE RAJEN KAMEI R/O KAGUILUANG NAGA COLONY SILCHAR DIST-CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788001 6:RINKU SUKLABAIDYA S/O UPENDRA SUKLABAIDYA VILL-NAGDIGRAM PART-IV P.O.-NAGDIGRAM P.S.-SONAI DIST-CACHAR (ASSAM) PIN-788121 7:RATNOJEET NATH S/O RABINDRA NATH R/O SRIKONA GRANT SILCHAR SRIKONA T.V. TOWER ROAD P.O.-SRIKONA DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78815 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) :Ms. R Choudhury Advocates for the respondent(s) :Mr. HK Das Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court Date of hearing & judgment :17.07.2025 JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Heard Ms. R Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Page No.# 3/4 the petitioner. Mr. HK Das, the learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court, who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. None appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 5, when the matter was called upon. 2. The petitioner herein has assailed the appointment of the respondent No.5 solely on the ground that the respondent No.5 is 40 years on the date of the filing of the application and, as such, the respondent No.5 could not have been eligible in terms with the advertisement issued on 01.03.2023. 3. Taking into account that the issue involved is in a very narrow compass, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the advertisement dated 01.03.2023 stipulates at Clause 5 that the candidate must not be less than 18 years and not more than 40 years of age as on 01.01.2023. It is further mentioned that relaxation of the age will be as per Government norms. 4. Mr. HK Das, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Gauhati High Court has placed before this Court the office memorandum dated 02.09.2020 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel (B) Department which categorically stipulates that the Government has decided to raise the upper age limit by 5(five) years over the general age limit i.e., up to 45 years from the existing 43 years for entry into State Government Page No.# 4/4 Services in respect to candidates who belonged to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes; by 3(three) years i.e. up to 43 years in respect to the candidates belonging to the OBC/MOBC; by 2(two) years i.e. up to 42 years in respect to the Ex-servicemen and by 10(ten) years i.e. up to 50 years in respect to Persons with Disabilities. The said Office Memorandum is kept on record and marked with the letter ‘X’. 5. Taking into account that the respondent No.5 was 40 years as would be apparent, which is an admitted aspect of the matter and the respondent No.5 admittedly also is a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Tribe (Plain), the eligibility of the respondent No.5 in terms with the Office Memorandum dated 02.09.2020 is up to the age of 45 years. Therefore, there is no illegality in the selection and appointment of the respondent No.5 to the post of Peon in pursuant to the advertisement dated 01.03.2023. 6. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit in the instant writ petition, for which, the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant