MUKUT SARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for setting aside of the order dated 05.07.2008 passed by the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur whereby the process of selection and appointment of the petitioner as Mauzadar of Mayang Mauza were quashed. The case projected in this petition, in short, is that the petitioner, who is an Arts graduate, was working as a teacher in a venture school. An advertisement/notice dated 27.07.2006 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon District inviting applications from intending candidates fulfilling the conditions as indicated therein to fill up the post of Mauzadar of Mayang Mauza, which had fallen vacant on the death of the incumbent Mauzadar on 29.05.2006. Pursuant to the said advertisement/notice, the petitioner along with others applied for the said post and the petitioner and the respondents No. 4 and 5 were called for an interview to be held on 03.10.2006. In the interview, the petitioner obtained 85 marks while the respondents Nos. 4 and 5 obtained 51 and 52 marks, respectively. Thereafter, by an order dated 30.03.2007, the petitioner was appointed by the respondent No. 3 as Mauzadar of Mayang Mauza on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said appointment order. The petitioner joined the post of Mauzadar on 07.04.2007 and had furnished sureties of landed properties of the value of Rs. 8,26,393.00 and also deposited a National Savings Certificate of Rs. 10,000/-.

(2.) It is pleaded in the writ petition that erstwhile Mayang Mauza in the District of Morigaon was trifurcated to form three new Mauzas, namely, Mayang, Manaha and Ghagua. Shri Ramesh Chandra Deka, on whose death the post of Mauzadar of Mayang Mauza had fallen vacant, was a permanent resident of village-Bhakatgaon of undivided Mayang Mauza. It is further pleaded that respondent No. 4 is neither a resident of Mayang Mauza nor she has any immovable property it the said Mauza. The petitioner, on the other hand, is a permanent resident of Mayang Mauza and has immovable property in the said Mauza. He is a graduate while respondent No. 4 is a Matriculate, which is apparent from the application dated 20.06.2006 filed by the respondent No. 4 to the respondent No. 3 praying for her appointment as a Mauzadar of Mayang Mauza. It is also apparent from the said application that she is a permanent resident of Bhakatgaon under Manaha Mauza.

(3.) Aggrieved by the appointment of the petitioner as Mauzadar, two separate appeals were filed-one by the respondent No. 4 and the other by the respondent No. 5, before the respondent No. 2.