Point of Law : Legislature may pass laws with retrospective effect subject to the recognized constitutional limitations, it is equally well settled that no retrospective effect should be given to any statutory provision so as to impair or take away an existing right, unless the statute either expressly or by necessary implication directs that it should have retrospective effect.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Handique, learned standing counsel, Revenue Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. D. Nath, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.3, 4, 5 & 6.

2. The petitioners’ case is that pursuant to an Employment Notice dated 18.07.2016 issued by the respondent No.5, for filling up the post of Gaonburah of Mahimabari (4 No. Lat), Kakotykuri Gaon (7 No. Lat), Patigaon (4 No. Lat), Bajalkota Missing Gaon (6 No. Lat) and Shaidal Kacharigaon (1 No. Lat), the petitioners applied for the same. The petitioners were successful in the recruitment process and thereafter police verification was conducted with regard to their character and antecedent.

The said verification was also completed and while the petitioners were awaiting for their appointment orders, the respondents issued the advertisement dated 28.05.2018 for filling up the vacant post of Gaonburahs of the villages that were already advertised by the Employment Notice dated 18.07.2016. The petitioners who belong to the Shaida Kacharigaon No.1 Lat of Borhola Mouza under Titabor Revenue Circle in the district of Jorhat, Bajalkota and Miri Gaon No.6 Lat of Borhola Mouza under Titabor Revenue Circle in the district of Jorhat and Mahimabari Grant No.4 Lat of Amguri Kharikatiya Mouza under Titabor Revenue Circle in the district of Jorhat are before this Court challenging the fresh advertisement dated 28.05.2018.

3. The petitioners’ counsel submits that the Employment Notice dated 18.07.2016 has not been cancelled, though the same appears to have been kept in abeyance vide W.T. Message dated 20.02.2017 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management (LR) Department. The petitioners’ counsel submits that the State respondents decided to issue a new advertisement dated 28.05.2018, for filling up the above mentioned posts of Gaonburah, in view of there being amendments made to the Executive Instructions contained in the Assam Land Revenue Regulations, 1886 (hereinafter referred to as the “1886 Regulations”). He submits that the amendments have been made by way of the Assam Land Revenue Regulations, 1886 (Amendment) 2018, hereinafter referred to as the “2018 Amendment” vide Notification dated 10.04.2018.

4. The petitioners’ counsel submits that the petitioners have been selected in terms of the selection process held pursuant to the Employment Notice dated 18.07.2016 and that police verification of the selected candidates had also been done on 25.11.2016. As the only requirement for completing the selection process was the issuance of appointment orders, the State respondents should be directed to issue appointment orders appointing the petitioners as Gaonburahs of their respective villages.

5. Mr. D. Nath and Mr. J. Handique, learned counsels for the respondents submit that the amendments have been made to the Executive Instructions by way of the “2018 Amendment”, in respect of some of the clauses of the Executive Instructions provided in the “1886 Regulations”. As such, the new advertisement dated 28.05.2018 had to be issued in terms of the “2018 Amendment”, as the earlier Employment Notice had been made by way of the earlier amended regulations provided in the Notification dated 06.01.2016.

Mr. D. Nath submits that after the selection process was over, the appointment orders could not be issued due to the pendency of Title Suit No.7/2016 and Title Suit No.8/2016 in the Court of the Munsiff, Titabor. Though the Title Suit No.7/2016 and Title Suit No.8/2016 were disposed of on 14.08.2017, the selection process was not completed due to the fresh advertisement being issued on 28.05.2018 by the respondents, pursuant to the amendment of the Executive Instructions vide Notification dated 10.04.2018. He further submits that the appointment orders of the petitioners were not issued in view of the W.T. Message dated 20.02.2017 issued by the Join