Y. KUNJALAL SINGHA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter pertains to selection and appointment to the post of Lecturer in Manipur in the college called Janata College, Kabuganj, Cachar for which an advertisement was issued and published in the newspaper on 7.06.2009. The post was reserved for OBC/MOBC candidates. Responding to the employment notice, candidates including the petitioner and the respondent No. 6 offered candidatures. Thereafter, the Selection Committee constituted by the Governing Body of the College conducted the selection in which the respondent No. 6 was recommended as the first nominee and the petitioner as the second nominee. The recommendation made by the Selection Committed was accepted by the Governing Body of the College and as per the requirement of the Rules, approval of the Director Higher Education towards formal appointment of the respondent No. 6 was sought for. However, no approval has been granted in view of the pendency of this proceeding. The grounds on which the writ petition has been filed challenging the selection of the respondent No. 6 are as follows:

(2.) IN the counter -affidavit filed by the respondents, both official and the private, the aforesaid pleas of the petitioner have been denied. It has been stated that the respondent No. 6 had duly submitted his OBC Certificate before the last date of receipt of applications and even otherwise also there being no dispute that he belongs to OBC being Manipuri, there was no impediment towards acceptance of the said status, which he is holding since his birth. As regards recognition of Manipuri OBC candidate in the State of Assam, referring to the list of OBC and MOBC classes in the state of Assam, it has been contended that since the said list includes Manipuri along with Manipuri Brahmins and Manipuri Muslims, merely because the respondent No. 6 hails from the State of Manipur, he cannot be deprived of participation in the selection process. As regards the experience etc. as a Lecturer, it has been contended that the experience gathered by both the candidates were duly taken note of and that is why the petitioner was awarded 5 out of 5 marks and the respondent No. 6 was awarded 4 out of 5 marks. This aspect of the matter need not detain us, as the petitioner has primarily confined his case in respect of the issue raised regarding the OBC status of the respondent No. 6.

(3.) COUNTERING the arguments advanced by Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel representing the respondent College has submitted that in the educational institutions the requirement being that of lecturer in Manipuri language and both the petitioner and the respondent No. 6 being qualified in Manipuri language and also belonging to Manipuri community, were considered in the selection and the Selection Committee having recommended the respondent No. 6 in preference to the petitioner, the issue relating to OBC status of the respondent No. 6 as prayed by the petitioner is uncalled for and totally misplaced. He also submits that the list of OBC in the State of Assam having included Manipuri along with Manipuri Brahmin and Manipuri Muslims, no distinction can be made between the Manipuris, who are ordinary resident of the State of Assam and those hailing from the State of Manipur also in the category of OBC. Referring to some other entries in the list such as Rajbongshi or Koch referable to Koch of Goalpara and Garo Hills only, he has submitted that had their been any intention to exclude the Manipuris of the State of Manipur, there would have been clear mention of the same in the aforesaid list.