Page No.# 1/3 GAHC030000672026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/10/2026 Sh. Lawmsangkima S/o R.C. Lalnghakliana R/o Dawrpui, Aizawl VERSUS The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secy. to the Govt. of Mizoram and 4 Ors. Aizawl 2:The Secy. to the Govt. of Mizoram Land Revenue and Settlement Dept. 3:The Secy. to the Govt. of Mizoram DP and AR 4:The Mizoram Public Service Commission r/b its Chairman 5:The Controller of Examinations Mizoram Public Service Commission Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr A.R. Malhotra Advocate for the Respondent : Addl. AG/GA, Mizoram for R1-3 Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 17.02.2026 Heard Mr. C. Tlanthianghlima, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner is aggrieved with the inclusion of candidates having B.E. Degree, who have also applied for the post of surveyor under the Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Government of Mizoram. The learned counsel submits that as per the Mizoram Land Revenue & Settlement Department (Group ‘B’ post) Recruitment Rules, 2021, the educational and other qualifications stipulated for the said post is a Bachelor’s Degree from a recognized University with at least one year Survey Course from any Government recognized institution. The learned counsel submits that it has come to the knowledge of the petitioner through RTI that at least forty five (45) applicants having B.E. Degree are found to be eligible for the post of Surveyor. He, therefore, submits that if the same is allowed, the petitioner and other similar situated applicants having Bachelor’s Degree with one year Surveyor Course will have lesser chance of being selected and appointed to the post in question. He therefore submits that the applicants, who have B.E. Degree should not be allowed to participate for the post of Surveyor. [2.] Mr. J. C. lalnunsanga, learned Standing Counsel, MPSC, at this stage, submits that the petitioner along with nineteen (19) others had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 94 of 2025 by which a similar challenge was made on account of inclusion of candidates having B.E. Degree. The only difference is that vacancy was for the year 2024-2025, whereas, the present writ petition pertains to vacancy for the year 2025-2026. He submits Page No.# 3/3 that the MPSC sought a clarification from the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, as to whether, the candidates having B.E. Degree would be eligible to participate in the selection process. The reply received was that the Engineering course such as B.E. Civil also includes a course on surveying and such being the position, the Engineers having the qualification of B.E. Civil will also be eligible to participate for the said post. He therefore submits that upon obtaining such clarification and the same being submitted to this Court, a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 13.02.2026, dismissed the writ petition. He submits that the present petitioner was also one of the petitioner i.e. the petitioner No. 13 in WP(C) No. 94 of 2025 and since the present case is squarely covered by the earlier Judgment and Order, the instant writ petition may not be entertained by this Court. [3.] Mr. C. Tlanthianghlima, learned counsel submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the appellate forum against the Judgment and Order rendered in WP(C) No. 94 of 2025. [4.] In view of above, the writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. [5.] As for the prayer for liberty, the same is found to be not necessary as it is always open for the petitioner to challenge the Judgment of a Single Bench before a Division Bench in the manner prescribed by the Rules and Procedures, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant