Answar Hussain Mazarbhuiya and 4 Ors v. The State of Assam and 15 Ors

ORDER

20.03.2024

¶1Mr. J. Laskar, learned counsel appears for the petitioners. Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appears for the respondent no.1 while Mr. S.S. Roy, learned counsel appears for the respondent no.2.

¶2Mr. J. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners amongst others had applied for a Deed Writer Licence under the District Registrar, Hailakandi. Accordingly they had participated in the interview held on 24.01.2024. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite performing well in the interview, the respondent no.2 illegally and arbitrarily selected the respondent nos.3 to 16 by secretly publishing a Select List.

¶3The petitioners' counsel submits that the petitioners have been working under registered Deed Writers for the last 5 to 10 years. However, some of the respondents who do not have the same experience as the petitioners, have been selected. He submits that there is no provision for conducting a written examination or interview for a Deed Writer, in terms of Rule 14 of the Assam Registration Manual. As such there could not have been any interview for selecting the private respondents for grant of licence as a Deed Writer. He also submits that as the private respondents have been arbitrarily selected, the petitioners had written a representation dated 02.03.2024 addressed to the District Commissioner, Hailakandi to conduct an inquiry with regard to the interview process conducted for selecting the successful candidates for grant of Page No.# 6/7 a Deed Writer's licence. However, the same has not been done till date.

¶4The respondent nos.3 to 16 are the private respondents, who have been selected to be given licences as Deed Writers.

¶5A perusal of the writ petition clearly shows that no fundamental or legal right of the petitioners has been violated. Though the petitioners' counsel has taken a stand that Rule 14 of the Assam Registration Manual does not provide for grant of licence to Deed Writers on the basis of a written examination or interview, the petitioners have not been able to show as to what process is to be followed, for selecting persons to be granted the said licence. In any event, the petitioners having taken part in the interview for grant of Deed Writers licence, they cannot be allowed to turn around and challenge the procedure followed, after they have been found to be unsuccessful in the selection process. It is not the case of the petitioners that they had secured higher marks in the interview than the private respondents. Their only stand is that though they did well in the interview, they were not selected. The petitioners have asked for an inquiry to be made in the interview process only because they have not been selected for grant of the Deed Writers licence. No specific ground/reason has been given by the petitioners as to why an inquiry should be conducted. The prayer for holding an inquiry has to be based on certain facts and cannot be based on suspicion/speculation that something was amiss during the interview process. This Court cannot embark on a roving inquiry or direct a roving inquiry to be made only because the petitioners have not been selected for grant of Deed Writer Licence. No grounds have been made out by the petitioner for this Court to exercise it's discretion in this case. Page No.# 7/7

¶6Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed, as being without any merit.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/7 GAHC010054512024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1596/2024o ANSWARoHUSSAINoMAZARBHUIYAoANDo4oORSo S/O-oLATEoABDULoNOORoMAZARBHUIYA,o R/O-oBATIRKUPAoPART-II,o DISTRICT-oHAILAKANDI,oASSAM. 2:oABULoHASANoLASKAR oS/O-oMAINULoHOQUEoLASKAR o R/O-oDAKHINoSUNAPURoPART-I o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 3:oJUBAIRoAHMEDoMAZUMDER oS/O-oMOINoUDDINoMAZUMDER o R/O-oMONACHERRAoGRANT o P.O.-oMONACHERRA o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 4:oANSARoULLAoLASKAR oS/O-oSAFARoAHMEDoLASKAR o R/O-oNISCHITAPURoPART-II o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 5:oABUoSAHIDoLASKAR oS/O-oMISIRoALIoLASKAR o PageoNo.#o2/7 R/O-oBOALIPARoPART-II o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAMo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo15oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o REVENUEoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,o GUWAHATI-6. 2:THEoDISTRICToREGISTRAR oHAILAKANDI. 3:AKBARoHUSSAINoBARBHUIYA oS/O-oALIoAHMEDoBARBHUIYA o R/O-oGANGPARoDHUMKAR o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 4:BURHANoUDDINoCHOUDHURY oS/O-oINTAJoALIoCHOUDHURY o R/O-oNETAINAGARoPART-II o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 5:ARUNoKUMARoDAS oS/O-oLATEoSOCHINDRAoMOHANoDAS o R/O-oHAILAKANDIoTOWNoWARDoNO.o7 o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI o788151. 6:BADRULoISLAMoBARBHUIYA oS/O-oJASHIMoUDDINoBARBHUIYA o R/Oo-KAPNARPAR o P.O.-oKALIBARIoBAZAR o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. PageoNo.#o3/7 7:NURULoHOQUEoLASKAR oS/O-oSAFIKULoHOQUEoLASKAR o R/O-oBOALIPARoPART-II o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM.o PIN-o788155. 8:SAHABoUDDINoBARBHUIYA oS/O-oABDULoMANNANoBARBHUIYA o R/O-oBAHADURPURoPART-I o P.O.-oR.P.oROAD o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. 9:SOHIDULoALOMoLASKAR oS/O-oLATEoMONJURoALIoLASKAR o R/O-oRATANPURoPART-II o P.O.-oR.P.oROAD o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM.o PIN-o788155. 10:SAHABoUDDINoLASKAR oS/O-oLATEoSAMANoALIoLASKAR o R/O-oBROJOPURoPART-I o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM.o PIN-o788155. 11:IMDADURoRAHMANoBARBHUIYA oS/O-oLATEoSAKARoALIoBARBHUIYA o R/O-oDUDHPUR o DIST.-oHAILAKANDI oASSAM. Page No.# 4/7 12:IKBAL HUSSAIN BARLASKAR S/O- MOINUL HOQUE BARLASKAR R/O- RANGAUTI PART-II DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 13:MEHBUB AHMED BARBHUIYA S/O- ABDUR RASHID BARBHUIYA R/O- LAKHINAGAR DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 14:SAMSUL ALOM MAZUMDEE S/O- LATE ASHOK UDDIN MAZUMDER R/O- RANGAUTI PART-I DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 15:ZIAUR RAHMAN LASKAR S/O LATE SAMSUL HOQUE LASKAR R/O- CHIPORSANGON PART-III DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. 16:FOKRUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA S/O- LAE SUNAB ALI BARBHUIYA R/O- DUDGPUR DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE Page No.# 5/7 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA