Point of Law : 10. Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement like in case on hand.

JUDGMENT :

R.M. CHHAYA, J.

1. Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R.K. Borah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondents.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 3169/2022, the appellant/original petitioner has preferred this appeal.

3. The following facts emerge from the record of the appeal:

It is the case of the appellant that his father Sri Biren Medhi was an active participant of the Assam Movement. It is the further case of the appellant that while taking part in the Assam Movement, his father sustained injuries and because of the injury so sustained, his father became physically disabled. Relying upon a certificate dated 09.06.2017 issued by the All Assam Students’ Union, the appellant claims that he is entitled to preferential appointment being a son of the victim. The appellant has also relied upon a certificate dated 31.07.2019 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat to the effect that his father was a ‘victim’ in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners. Thus, it is the case of the appellant that as per the provisions of the Assam Public Services (Preferential Appointment) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’ for the sake of brevity), he has every right to get employment under the provisions of the Rules. The record indicates that the appellant approached the authorities by filing representation dated 08.10.2021, which was not considered and hence, the appellant approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the authorities to appoint him in any Grade-III post under the provisions of the Rules. The appellant/original petitioner predominantly relied upon the certificate dated 09.06.2017 issued by the All Assam Students’ Union, which is in the form of “Victim Certificate” and so also the certificate dated 31.07.2019 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat, which is to the effect that the appellant’s father was a ‘victim’ in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners.

4. The learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsels for the parties, was pleased to dismiss the writ petition and hence, this appeal.

5. Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the appellant reiterated the contentions which were raised before the learned Single Judge and contended that the petitioner belongs to the category of ‘Affected Candidate’ as defined in Rule 2(a) of the Rules and, as such, the appellant would be entitled to preferential appointment. It was contended by Mr. Islam that the learned Single Judge has not considered the materials on record and has wrongly come to the conclusion that the father of the appellant did not suffer from any physical disability as per the provisions of Rule 2(f) of the Rules and thus committed an error in dismissing the writ petition. It was also contended that the learned Single Judge has wrongly brushed aside the cogent evidence in the form of certificate issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat as well as by All Assam Students’ Union. It was therefore contended that the appeal be allowed, as prayed for.

6. Per contra, Mr. R.K. Borah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam has contended that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in dismissing the writ petition. Mr. Borah contended that only because the relationship is established, the same would not ipsofactomean that the appellant would be entitled to the benefits under the Rules. Mr. Borah contended that the certificate issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat is only to the effect that the appellant’s father was a victim in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreig