SUKUR ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent no.1 and Mr. B.D. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. R. Deka, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7. None appears on call for private respondent nos. 8 to 13.

(2.) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the engagement of the private respondent nos. 8 to 13 as trainee Sahayak, and also prayed for a direction to the APDCL authorities, i.e. respondent nos.2 to 7 to select and appoint the petitioner as Sahayak.

(3.) In short, the case of the petitioner is that he had successfully completed the course of Industrial Training Institute of Government of Assam (ITI for short) and had passed out the prescribed test in the Trade of Electrician. The petitioner belongs to unreserved category.