Disposed

Nasir Uddin Mazumder v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Jun 2022WP(C)/3507/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of two writ petitions seeking age limit relaxation to contest as Peon post. It held no relief was permissible as the respondent had already conducted selection and appointed others in 2014 without relaxing age limits, and petitioner failed to demonstrate right to such relaxation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's request for age limit relaxation and direction for appointment was dismissed; writ petitions closed.

Nasir Uddin Mazumder Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010123342014

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1412/2014

¶5

NASIR UDDIN MAZUMDAR

¶6

S/O LT. ABDUL JALIL MAZUMDAR VILL- KUCHILA GRANT NUTON BAZAR, P.O. KUCHILA P.S. HAILAKANDI, DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE SECRETARY, JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI781006.

¶10

2:THE DISTRICT and SESSIONS JUDGE

¶11

HAILAKANDI P.O. P.S. and DIST. HAILAKANDI.

¶12

3:THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

¶13

HAILAKANDI P.O. and DIST. HAILAKANDI PIN - 788152

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.S ROY

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : MR.U K NAIRR-2 and R-3

¶16

Linked Case : WP(C)/3507/2013

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

NASIR UDDIN MAZUMDER S/O- LT. ABDUL JALIL MAZUMDER VILL.- KUCHILA GRANT NUTON BAZAR P.O.- KUCHILA P.S. and DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM.

¶19

VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. JUDICIAL DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 2:THE DIST. and SESSIONS JUDGE HAILAKANDI P.O. P.S. and DIST.- HAILAKANDI. 3:THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE HAILAKANDI P.O. and DIST.- HAILAKANDI PIN- 788152. 4:SRI BISWAJIT ACHARJEE S/O- ANIL ACHARJEE VILL/TOWN- COLLEGE ROAD HAILAKANDI TOWN WARD NO.13 P.O.- HAILAKANDI Dist- HAILAKANDI PIN-788151. 5:SRI JAYANTA DEKA VILL/TOWN- CIRCUIT HOUSE ROAD HAILAKANDI TOWN P.O. and DIST- HAILAKANDI PIN-788151. 6:SRI PINAK BARMAN S/O- AKHIL CHANDRA BARMAN VIIL- BORBOND P.S.- BARKHALA P.O.- SUBONG DIST- CACHAR PIN-788110. -----------Advocate for : MS.S ROY Advocate for : MR.P P BORTHAKURR- 4

¶20

Page No.# 3/4

¶21

5and6 appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

¶22

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 15-06-2022

¶25

Heard Mr. S. R. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. K. Parajuli, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondent no. 1 and Mr. M. P. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3 in both the writ petitions and Ms. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4, 5 & 6 in WP(C)No. 3507/2013.

¶26

WP(C) No. 3507/2013 has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the interview by relaxing the upper age limit of the petitioner by 3 (three) years and 9 (nine) months, in an interview proposed to be held for the post of Peon as advertised by the respondent no. 3, i.e. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi. WP(C)1412/2014 has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent authority to consider the appointment of the petitioner in the vacant post shown in the advertisement, which is stated to be dated 01.05.2013.

¶27

Ms. A. Hussain, learned counsel representing respondent nos. 4, 5 & 6 in WP(C)3507/2013, has submitted that the respondent nos. 4, 5 & 6 have been appointed on 23.07.2014 after selection was held pursuant to the advertisement, referred to hereinabove.

¶28

Since selection pursuant to the advertisement has been held and appointment made as far back as in the year 2014 and that there has not

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

been any relaxation of the upper age limit of the writ petitioner by the respondent authorities and consequently, the petitioner did not participate in the selection held pursuant to the advertisement and also in view of the fact that the relaxation of the upper age limit is within the domain of the competent authorities, which in the instant case has not been exercised in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner having not been able to demonstrate before this Court any right in his favour for such relaxation by the respondent authorities, no relief sought for by the petitioner in the instant writ petition appears to be permissible at this stage.

¶31

Accordingly, both the writ petitions stands closed and disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Nasir Uddin Mazumder v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasir Uddin Mazumder v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thulen Brahma and 20 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Tinku Das Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Mukut Baishya and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

National Insuranc Co. Ltd., Vs Dipjyoti Rajkhowa and 8 Ors.

Baikuntha Lakhar Vs Rakesh Kumar and 2 Ors.

Bitul Neog Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.