PRANAB KUMAR SAHA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Additional Advocate General for the State authorities and Mr. F.U. Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

(2.) The petitioner participated in a selection process pursuant to an advertisement dtd. 16/8/2008 amongst others, for the post of Sub-Inspector in the Food and Civil Supplies Department. Without going into much detail and to put the matter in its proper perspective, the allegation of the petitioner is that the selection comprises of two stages of written test and viva voce and the answer scripts of the petitioner which were submitted by him later on came to be known that it had contained two tick marks in respect of one answer and accordingly, the entire answer scripts of the petitioner stood invalidated.

(3.) To progress with the matter further we heard the respondents and it was the stand of the respondents that it is the petitioner who was responsible for giving two tick marks for one answer. To decide the rival contentions we required the matter to be enquired by the CID by our earlier order dtd. 30/3/2023.