AMIT SHARMA Vs. JYOTISHMOY BORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr K.N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) In pursuance of an advertisement published by Pragjyotish College, Guwahati, for the post of Lecturer in Geography (non-sanctioned) many candidates had applied, including the appellant (respondent No. 3 in the writ petition) and the respondent No. 1 (writ petitioner). It may be observed here that the College is a private College receiving aid from the State Government, but the post in question was a non-sanctioned post. Both the appellant and the respondent No. 1 fulfilled the minimum requisite qualifications for the post. The Governing Body had constituted a Selection Committee for selecting a suitable candidate. After interview on 28.2.2000, the Selection Committee placed respondent No. 1 at SI. No. 1 in the merit list, whereas the appellant was placed at SI. No. 3 in the merit list. However, the Governing Body chose to appoint the appellant, who was placed at SI. No. 3 in the merit list. This led the present respondent No. 1 to file WP(C) No. 4070/ 2000. It may be observed here that the Motion Bench in the writ petition had passed an order on 31.7.2000 that if any appointment is to be made, the same would be subject to the result of the writ petition. The learned Single Judge, vide the judgment dated 12.4.2002, allowed the writ petition and set aside the appointment of the appellant. In the course of the judgment, the learned Single Judge observed that :- "In the instant case the Governing Body of the College had not submitted any affidavit." It was further observed that the respondent No. 3 (now appellant) in his affidavit tried to justify that he is superior in merit to the writ petitioner.

(3.) Really speaking, it is the job of the Selection Committee to select the best person available who has fulfilled the requisite qualifications and unless there is something palpably wrong in the selection, the Governing Body cannot sit over the judgment of the expert Selection Committee to say that in fact another candidate was better than the one selected, or one is more meritorious than the other. The Selection Committee is supposed to have considered all the material which is available along with the applications of the candidates.