The exclusion of RCCC trained nominees from Autonomous Councils from recruitment for Land Records Assistant posts is unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER

(A. D. Choudhury, J)

1. We have heard Mr. A.K.Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Thaosen, learned Standing counsel, representing the Dima Hasao and Mr. D. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioners, all of whom have undergone the Recorders’ Certificate Class Course (hereinafter referred to as “RCCC”) training from the Assam Survey and Settlement Training Centre of the Government of Assam, under the Revenue and Disaster Management Department in various sessions from 2017 to 2024, have questioned the validity of Rule 5(1A) of the Assam Land Records Subordinate Service (Amendment) Rules, 2025, which amends the Assam Land Records Subordinate Service Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules of 2023”), thereby allowing only pre-trained RCCC candidates to appear for recruitment to the entry level post of Land Records Assistant (equivalent to Lot Mandal), as a one-time measure, but explicitly excluding the candidates nominated by Territorial and Autonomous Council areas, like, Bodoland Territorial Autonomous Council, N.C. Hills Autonomous Council, etc., on the ground of the same being arbitrary and violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioners and that the amendment, in effect, causes discrimination based on residence or places of birth, despite some of them being non-tribals and not claiming any tribal priority rights.

3. Similar challenge was made in WP(C) No. 143/2026 and other connected writ petitions. This Court under its judgment and order dated 23.04.2026 in the aforesaid writ petitions, held that the impugned amendment in the Rules of 2023, introducing classification of RCCC trained nominees of the Autonomous Councils from being considered for one-time adjustments does not muster the constitutionality required for its validation.

4. Accordingly, the challenge was allowed by striking down the Amendment Rule to that extent as unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Article 14 & Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

5. The exclusionary part in the Advertisement No. DLR-11013(21)/50/2025/130 dated 14.03.2026 was also struck down as constitutionally invalid.

6. Accordingly, with the aforesaid declaration, it was directed that the petitioners, if otherwise eligible, would be required to be allowed to participate in the selection process against the aforenoted advertisement for their selection in Government jobs.

7. Parties are in ad idem that the aforesaid judgment and order dated 23.04.2026, shall also cover the case of the present petitioners.

8. In view of the aforesaid consensus and taking note of the facts pleaded before us, we dispose of the present writ petition in terms of the determination made by this Court under its judgment and order dated 23.04.2026, passed in WP(C) No. 143/2026 and other writ petitions.