Kumar Dipen Gogoi v. The State of Assam and 4 Ors

O R D E R

11.11.2024

None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call. Mr. J. K. Goswami, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the District Administration and Mr. A. Bhattachajee, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Revenue Department.

¶2The case of the petitioner herein in brief is that the petitioner had in pursuant to an employment notice dated

13.07.2020 submitted his application for filling up the post of Gaonburha. On 10.09.2020, the petitioner was called for interview to be held in the office of the respondent No.3 on

18.09.2020. Thereupon, the petitioner was interviewed on

18.09.2020 and a police verification report was sought. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner was issued another fresh call letter dated 10.09.2021 issued by the respondent No.3 intimating that the earlier result of selection for the post of Gaonburah in the village in question was cancelled and the petitioner was required to face the Interview Board again on 29.09.2021. It is under such circumstances, the petitioner had approached this Page No.# 3/3 Court by filing the instant writ petition.

¶3Pursuant to the filing of the instant writ petition, an affidavit has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur wherein it has been mentioned that there was no result published in respect to the earlier interview. It was further mentioned that the result of the interview held on 18.09.20200 for the post of Gaonbur could not be declared as the then Selection Committee members were transferred due to the conduct of Assembly Election, 2021 which led to the whole interview process being abandoned, and accordingly, on 10.09.2021, the respective candidates were notified regarding the cancellation of the earlier interview and to attend on 29.09.2021 for fresh interview.

¶4Taking into account the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner herein cannot claim a right on the basis of an interview being held without the result being published.

¶5Under such circumstances, as the instant writ petition is devoid of any merit, the writ petition stands dismissed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010154022021 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/5018/2021o KUMARoDIPENoGOGOIo S/O-oLT.oSOMESWARoGOGOI,oR/O-oTOWNoBANTAW,oWARDoNO.o14oNORTHo LAKHIMPUR,oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR,oASSAM,oPIN-o787031 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo4oORSo REP.oBYoTHEoCOMM.oANDoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,oREVENUEoAND D.M(LR)oDEPTT.,oDISPUR,oGHY-6 2:THEoDY.oCOMMISSIONER oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oNORTHoLAKHIMPUR oASSAM 3:THEoADDL.oDY.oCOMMISSIONERo(REVENUE) oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oNORTHoLAKHIMPUR oASSAM 4:THEoCIRCLEoOFFICER oToNORTHoLAKHIMPURoREVENUEoCIRCLE oDIST.-oJORHAT oASSAM 5:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICE oLAKHIMPUR oDIST.-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAo Forkthekpetitionerk(s)kkkk:kNonekappearskkk o Page No.# 2/3 For the respondent (s) : Mr. J. K. Goswami, Govt. Advocate Mr. A. Bhattacharjee, SC, Revenue BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH