BISWAJIT SURAJ MALAKAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of these two writ petitions, the petitioner has challenged the selection and appointment of the respondent No.5 as Demonstrator in Oral and Dental Pathology, Regional Dental College, Guwahati. In Annexure-6 letter dated 03.03.06 by which the APSC made a recommendation, the name of the petitioner appears at serial No. 2 while that of the respondent No.5 appears at serial No. 1. Be it stated here that both of them belong to Scheduled Castes category. The recommendation was made for the lone post of Demonstrator.

(2.) PURSUANT to such recommendation, the respondent No. 5 was appointed as Demon-strator by Annexure-7 order dated 19.09.06.

(3.) IT will be pertinent to mention at this stage that a RTI application was made relating to the question as to whether the respondent No. 5 had applied through proper channel or not. Be it stated here that at the time of responding to the advertisement, the respondent No. 5 was a Government employee serving as Dental Surgeon under the Joint Director of Health Services, Golaghat.When the aforesaid information was sought for through a RTI application, the Government of Assam in the Health and Family Welfare (B) Department issued an order dated 30.11.06 reverting the respondent No.5 back to his original post of Dental Surgeon on the ground that he did not apply through proper channel. The said order was put to challenge by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6457/06 by the respondent No.5 and while entertaining the writ petition by order dated 22.12.06, the operation of the said order was stayed. The writ petition was disposed of by order dated 17.09.07 quashing the order dated 30.11.06 reverting the respondent No.5 back to his original post of Dental Surgeon.