Parul Ahmed v. The State of Assam and 11 Ors

Judgment & Order Heard Shri AR Bhuiyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri NJ Khataniar, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department.

¶2Both these writ petitions being filed by the same petitioner and connected with the same recruitment process, have been heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order.

¶3The matter pertains to a recruitment process for the post of Junior Assistant in the Burunga Bazar Senior Madrassa in the district of Nagaon. An advertisement was issued on 17.12.2012 for the said post in which the petitioner, respondent no. 12 and other candidates had offered their candidatures. It is the contention of the petitioner that as at the relevant time, Page No.# 5/7 there were no recruitment rules, a notification dated 12.09.2012 laying down the procedures was governing the field. In the selection so held, while the petitioner claims to have been selected as the first nominee, he has alleged manipulation by which the positions have been altered and the respondent no. 12 has been shown to be the first nominee and the petitioner has been placed in the 3rd position. It is the case of the petitioner that on a comparison of the academic record, the petitioner steals a march over the respondent no. 12 and only by allotting more marks in the oral segment, undue favor has been given to the said respondent no. 12.

¶4Shri Bhuiyan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is a communication dated 23.04.2013 by the Chairman of the Selection Board wherein it has been stated that in the selection so held, the petitioner has secured the first position and the name of the private respondent no. 12 was not even amongst the panel of three candidates. It is also stated in the said communication that undue pressure was put on the Chairman to put his signature in the erroneous select list and accordingly, the complaint was made. The learned counsel has also submitted that in the WP(C)/2780/2013, an interim order was passed on 21.05.2013 directing that no appointment should be made and in spite of the said interim order, it transpires from the affidavits and other materials placed on record subsequently that the respondent no. 12 has been appointed. He submits that such appointment order was issued in violation of the interim order passed by the Court. He has however informed this Court that the aforesaid Institution has now been converted into a High School. However, the respondent no. 12 is continuing to serve in the said post.

¶5Shri Khataniar, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the selection was duly conducted in terms of the notification dated 12.09.2012. He submits Page No.# 6/7 that the procedure of the notification is not the subject matter of challenge and is the same were duly followed. By drawing the attention to the statement of marks of the panel of candidates, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that while the respondent no. 12 had secured 146.94%, the petitioner had secured 139.91%. He has also highlighted the aspect that there is one more candidate against candidate sl. no. 2 – Islam Uddin, who had secured more marks than the petitioner who however has not been made party respondent. So far as the communication dated 23.04.2013 is concerned, it is submitted that there is another communication by the said Chairman whereby a different stand has been taken and therefore the said communication cannot be given any credence.

¶6Though the private respondent no. 12 had entered appearance through counsel and has also filed an affidavit-in-opposition on 21.05.2014, none has appeared for the said respondent no. 12. The perusal of the said affidavit-in-opposition would however reveal that the President and Chairman of the Committee had issued a communication dated 06.05.2013 revoking the earlier complaint made by him and the matter was clarified.

¶7The selection appears to have been done by following the procedures laid down in the notification dated 12.09.2012. The notification stipulates for allotting marks for HSLC, Computer Diploma and Viva-Voce. Though it appears that the petitioner had secured slightly higher marks in the objective assessment consisting of HSLC and Computer Diploma, he had secured lesser marks than the respondent no. 12 in the Viva-Voce. Ultimately, it is the total marks which should be taken into consideration and as indicated above, while the total marks secured by the respondent no. 12 is 146.94%, those secured by the petitioner was 139.91%. This Court has also taken into consideration that Page No.# 7/7 above the petitioner, there is another candidate, namely, Islam Uddin, who had secured 141.14% who however has not been made party respondent.

¶8Even assuming that a case of interference is made out, the petitioner would not get any fruits of the litigation inasmuch as, there is another candidate mentioned above the petitioner against sl. No. 2. This Court has also taken into consideration that more than a decade had passed since the appointment of the respondent no. 12 and unsettling the said appointment may not serve the interest of justice, more so, when the petitioner would not be entitled for the appointment pursuant to the selection held in the year 2012.

¶9As regards the aspect of violation of the interim order, as per written instructions received by the learned Standing Counsel, while the appointment order was issued on 31.05.2013, it has been stated that copy of the interim order was received only on 01.06.2013.

¶10Considering all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no relief can be granted in this petition. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed.

¶11Interim order passed earlier stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/7 GAHC010234022013 ooooooo undefined ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/2780/2013ooooooooo PARULoAHMEDo S/OoABDULoJALIL,oVILL.oBURUNGATOLI,oP.O.oBURUNGAoBAZAR,oDIST-o NAGAON,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo5oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.o OFoASSAM,oEDUCATIONoSECONDARYoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGHY-6 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoMADRASSAoEDUCATION oASSAM oKAHILIPARA oGHY-19 3:SELECTIONoBOARDoOFoBURUNGAoBAZARoSENIORoMADRASSA oREPRESENTEDoBYoITSoSECRETARYoCUMoSUPERINTENDENT oP.O.oBURUNGAoBAZAR oDIST-oNAGAON oASSAM oPIN-782445 4:MD.oATARoALIoCHOUDHURY oPRESIDENToOFoTHEoMANAGINGoCOMMITTEEoOFoBURUNGAoBAZARo SENIORoMADRASSA oP.O.oBURUNGAoBAZAR oDIST-oNAGAON oASSAM oPIN782445 5:JALALoUDDIN Page No.# 2/7 SUPERINTENDENT CUM MEMBER SECRETARY OF BURUNGA BAZAR SENIOR MADRASSA P.O. BURUNGA BAZAR DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN782445 6:ASHFAK UDDIN S/O FAKAR UDDIN VILL. BURUNGATOLI P.O. BURUNGA BAZAR DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN-78244 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.D A KAIYUM, MRJ RAHMAN,MR.S H RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR.R A CHOUDHURY, MR. E AHMED,MR.N I KHAN,SC, EDU Linked Case : WP(C)/3473/2013 PARUL AHMED S/O ABDUL JALIL VILL. BURUNGATOLI P.O. BURUNGA BAZAR DIST- NAGAON VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION SECO DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF MADRASSA EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT PageoNo.#o3/7 oDISPUR oGHY-6 o4:THEoDY.oDIRECTOR MADRASSAoEDUCATION oASSAMoCUMoSECRETARYoSTATEoMADRASSAoEDUCATIONoBOARD oASSAM oKAHILIPARA oGHY-19 o5:ATARoALIoCHOUDHURY CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENToOFoTHEoSELECTIONoBOARDoOFoBURUNGAoBAZARo SENIORoMADRASSA oC/OoSUPERINTENDENT oBURUNGAoBAZARoSENIORoMADRASSA oP.O.oBURNGAoBAZAR oPIN-782445 oDIST-oNAGAON oASSAM o6:JALALoUDDIN MEMEBERoSECRETARYoOFoSELECTIONoBOARDo-oCUMo-oSUPERINTENDENTo OFoBURUNGAoBAZARoSENIORoMADRASSA oP.O.oBURNGAoBAZAR oPIN-782445 oDIST-oNAGAON oASSAM o7:ESHRAKHAQoALI o8:SHOFIQURoRAHMAN o9:FOIZoMOHAMMAD o10:BADARoUDDIN o11:FAKARoUDDIN RESPONDENToNO.7oTOo11oAREoTHEoMEMBERSoOFoTHEoSELECTIONoBOARDo OFoBURUNGAoBAZARoSENIORoMADRASSAMoC/OoSUPERINTENDENT oBURUNGAoBAZARoSENIORoMADRASSA oP.O.oBURNGAoBAZAR oPIN-782445 oDIST-oNAGAON oASSAM Page No.# 4/7 12:ASHFAK UDDIN S/O FAKAR UDDIN VILL. BIRUNGATOLI P.O. BURUNGATOLI BAZAR PIN-782445 DIST- NAGAON ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A R BHUIYAN Advocate for : MR.R A CHOUDHURY appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS B E F O R E Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI Advocate for the petitioners : Shri AR Bhuiyan Advocate for the respondents : Shri NJ Khataniar, SC-Edu. Deptt. Date of hearing : 19.09.2024 Date of Judgment : 19.09.2024