BIMAL CHANDRA MODAK Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.U. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the Secondary Education Department and Mr. D.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent on. 4.

(2.) The petitioner participated in a selection process for appointment of subject teacher in the Higher Secondary School in Assam. In the selection process he secured 245.74 marks and he had applied for a post of subject teacher in Satrsal Higher Secondary School, Dhubri. Smti Riju Moni Bora who had secured 272.02 marks in the selection process was the first candidate in order of merit for the Satrsal Higher Secondary School. The petitioner instituted WP(C) No. 3190/2013. Although a notification dated 04.04.2013 and the select list dated 06.04.2013 are assailed in WP(C) No. 3190/2013 but in course of hearing, the said grievances were not insisted upon. The petitioner in fact raised a question that he had secured 245.74 marks whereas the respondent no. 4 in the said writ petition namely, Sri Nihar Ranjan Nath had secured 224.82 marks but he was selected and appointed in the Lala Higher Secondary and Multipurpose School in the district of Karimganj. In the order dated 23.11.2016 in WP(C) No. 3190/2013 it was taken note of that the affidavit of the respondents therein was silent as to why Sri Nihar Ranjan Nath was appointed in Lala Higher Secondary and Multipurpose School although he had secured 224.82 marks whereas the petitioner had secured 245.74 marks. Accordingly, the respondents were required to reexamine the matter.

(3.) As required by the order dated 23.11.2016, a reexamination was done and the order dated 14.03.2017 had been passed by the Assistant Director of Secondary Education, Assam, which is assailed in this writ petition.