Abdul Kayum @ Mamun Abul Kayum Bhaskar Ali v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

ORDER Date : 20-06-2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

This Writ Appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated

09.08.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.5115/2022, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. The appellant applied for the post of Gaon Bura of village Koupati Gaon and Giladhari in Darrang District. When the appellant was not called for the interview, he approached the Court with the plea that the respondents are illegally treating the appellant under age, for appointment for the post of Gaon Bura. It is contended by the appellant before the learned Single Judge that the minimum age required for appointment for the post of Gaon Bura is thirty (30) years, as on 01.01.2022 and as per the birth certificate of the appellant, issued by the Registrar of Birth and Death, the date of birth of the appellant is

08.08.1990 and as such, on 01.01.2022, the appellant was above thirty (30) years of age. It is contended that the respondent authorities have not considered the candidature of the appellant and has not called him for interview, treating the date of birth of the appellant as 10.02.1993. It is Page No.# 3/3 submitted that the respondents have concluded that since the date of birth of the appellant is 10.02.1993, he is less than thirty (30) years of age and therefore, is not qualified for appointment for the post of Gaon Bura. The learned Single Judge after taking into consideration that in the Class-X Board Examination and other documents pertaining to the appellant, wherein the date of birth of the appellant is recorded as 10.02.1993 has observed that until and unless the date of birth of the appellant in the educational certificates is changed by a decision of the Civil Court or the competent authority, it cannot be treated that the date of birth of the appellant is different than 10.02.1993. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also after going through the materials available in the record, we do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed in the Writ Petition and hence, this Writ Appeal is dismissed.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010166822022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWA/275/2022o ABDULoKAYUMo@oMAMUNoABULoKAYUMoBHASKARoALIo S/OoLATEoALALoUDDINo@oALAoUDDIN,oVILL-KOUPATIoGAON,oP.O.-SILBORI, P.S.-DALGAON,oDIST-DARANG,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORS.o THROUGHoTHEoPRINCIPALoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o REVENUEoANDoREHABILITATIONoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI- 781006 2:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oMANGALDAI oDISToDARRANG oASSAM 3:THEoCIRCLEoOFFICER oDALGAONoREVENUEoCIRCLE oDALGAON oASSAM 4:THEoMOUZADAR oPUBoSHIALMARIoMOUZA oDISToDARRANG oASSAM 5:PRASANTAoKUMARoDALU oSONoOFoLT.oPRAFULLAoSARKAR oRESIDENToOFoVILLAGEo-oGHILADHARI oMOUZAo-oPUB-SIALMARI oDISTRICTo-oDARRANG oASSAM oPIN-784113o Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. M H CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE