Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010005252024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/161/2024 NASIR UDDIN AHMED S/O- LATE MOKBUL HUSSAIN, VILL. AND P.O.- NO. 2 DHARMAPUR, KEHUTOLI, P.S.- LALUK, DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR, PIN- 784160. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR LAND RECORDS AND SURVEY ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI- 781032. 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF THE NORTH ASSAM DIVISION TEZPUR- 784001. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR 787001. 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BIHURIA REVENUE CIRCLE BIHPURIA DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR 784161. Page No.# 2/5 6:HIFJUR RAHMAN S/O- FALJUR RAHMAN VILL. AND P.O.- NO. 1 DHARMAPUR. P.S.- LALUK DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN 784160 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R P SARMAH, MS A DEKA,MR. D DOLEY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, MR AZIZUR RAHMAN (R-6),MS ASFIA AHMED (R-6),MS P DEKA (R-6),MR. S N TAMULI (R-6),GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 27.05.2025 Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State of Assam; Mr. S.N. Tamuli, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6 and Mr. J. Handique, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue Department. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the order dated 15.07.2023 passed in Case No. 19/2022 by the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur. 3. In pursuance to an advertisement issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur, inviting applications from intending eligible candidates for filling up the post of Gaon Pradhan in different villages, including Bihpuria Revenue Circle of No. 1 & 2 Dharmapur Kehutoli Village in Lot No. 42, the petitioner Page No.# 3/5 applied for the post of Gaon Pradhan against No. 1 & 2 Dharmapur Kehutoli Village in Lot No. 42. Pursuant to the interview and selection process, results were declared by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur, vide the order dated 23.09.2022. The petitioner was not selected for the post of Gaon Pradhan for No. 1 & 2 Dharmapur Kehutoli Village in Lot No. 42 but the private respondent namely Hifjur Rahman had been selected in place of the petitioner. 4. Being aggrieved the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority, namely the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur. The appeal was registered as Case No. 19/2022. The appeal came to be dismissed by the appellate authority vide the order dated 15.07.2023. The appellate authority upheld the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur and declined to interfere with the orders passed in the appeal. 5. Being aggrieved the petitioner is before this Court. The basic contention of the writ petitioner is that the private respondent is not a qualified candidate and that there are complaints filed by villagers against the private respondent. The private respondent, who is represented by Mr. S.N. Tamuli learned counsel, on the other hand disputes the contentions raised by the petitioner and has also filed an affidavit-in-opposition. A rejoinder affidavit is filed by the petitioner reiterating his contentions before this Court in the writ petition. 6. When the matter was taken up before the Court, the relevant provisions under Section 162-D of the Assam Executive Instructions, framed under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 have been referred to and has also been carefully examined by this Court. Perusal of regulation 162-D reveals that there exists a provision for filing a review against orders passed by the Commissioners of the Division before the State Government, in accordance Page No.# 4/5 with the said provision. 7. The private respondents have also relied upon two Judgments — one rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench and the other by a Division Bench, of this Court. In both the matters the findings of the Court is that the provisions of Section 162-D providing for a review is alternative remedy which the petitioner’s before this Court is required to avail of. 8. The learned Senior Counsel therefore submits that, if liberty is granted by this Court, the petitioner may take recourse to renew and reject instructions under Section 162-D of the Assam Executive Instructions. 9. Considering the submissions made before this Court, and upon perusal of the pleadings on record, as well as the orders passed by the Civil Bench and the Division Bench, and after examining the relevant provisions of the Assam Executive Instructions, this Court is of the view that since provisions for further review against the orders passed by the Commissioner, and the petitioner also intends to avail of the same, it would be in the interest of justice to grant liberty to the petitioner to file a review petition before the appropriate authority within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. Under such circumstances, the writ petitioner shall file the review petition, along with a certified copy of this order, before the Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department. In the event the Commissioner and Secretary is not the appropriate authority to hear the review under Section 162-D of the Assam Executive Instructions, the said application shall be forwarded to the appropriate authority within a period of 10 (ten) days from the date of its receipt. Upon receipt of the review petition by the Page No.# 5/5 appropriate authority, the same shall be disposed of within a period of 90 (ninety) days, as prescribed under Section 162-D of the Assam Executive Instructions. 11. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above. 12. Interim orders if any stands vacated. 13. Pending I.A.s also dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant