NILAKSHI MILI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. TH Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. MK Mishra, learned Standing counsel, Education Department, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. I have also heard Mr. SK Talukdar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 7. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6.

(2.) PURSUANT to an advertisement, published, on 01-06-2005, by respondent No. 5, namely, President, Dergaon Kamal Dowerah College, Dergaon, Golaghat, inviting applications for filling up a post, amongst others, of Lecturer in the subject of Sanskrit, the petitioner, respondent No. 7 herein and 11 others applied for selection and appointment. The advertisement had made it clear that a candidate must have passed National Level Eligibility Test (NET) or State Level Eligibility Test (SLET) and must also have UGC norms with good academic career. In the interview held on 10-11-2009, only two candidates, namely, the petitioner and respondent No. 7 appeared. None of them had passed NET or SLET and were, therefore, not eligible to participate in the selection process. The Selection Committee, which had interviewed the candidates, on 10-11- 2009, recorded, in its proceedings, that after having interviewed the two candidates, they found one of the candidate's performance satisfactory, but none of the two candidates fulfilled the norms of NET or SLET and one, whose performance was satisfactory, had M. Phil degree and as far as the performance of the other candidate was concerned, it was not found satisfactory. The Selection Committee accordingly recommended that the post be re-advertised. The proceedings of the Selection Committed were placed, on 21-11-2009, before the Government Body of the College concerned. The Government Body resolved to request the Director of Higher Education, Assam, to consider if respondent No. 7, who has been working as a Lecturer in the Department of Sanskrit of the said College, on ad hoc basis and possesses M. Phil degree, can be appointed to the said post of lecturer in Sanskrit. The resolution was accordingly forwarded to respondent No. 2, namely, Director of Higher Education, Assam, Kahilipara.

(3.) THE petitioner, therefore, contends that though he was not eligible to apply for appointment to the post, he, having acquired necessary qualification before the date of the interview, ought to have been selected.