DR. MANIDIPA BARUAH Vs. GAUHATI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A resolution dated 26.10.2006 passed by the Executive Council of the Guwahati University reiterating an earlier decision for the appointment of the respondent No. 4 has been assailed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition.

(2.) The case has a checkered history and for a better appreciation of the issues involved, the facts, in brief, must be noticed at this stage. On 10.9.2005 an advertisement was issued by the Registrar of the Guwahati University inviting applications for filling up, inter alia, one post of Lecturer in Psychology. Four persons including the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 applied. In accordance with the prevailing norms, the applications received were scrutinised by the Head of the Department to determine the eligibility of the candidates as laid down. All the four candidates who applied were found to be eligible. Thereafter, the Bio-datas of the candidates were sent to two experts who were working in the Psychology Departments of other universities. The opinion of both the experts, i.e., Prof. R.X. Dixit of JNB University, Jodhpur and Prof. Shafique of Jamia Milia University, Delhi are to the effect that both the petitioner as well as respondent No. 4 are eligible and further that amongst the candidates who had applied. It is the petitioner who is the most suitable candidate. Thereafter, a meeting of the Selection Committee was convened on 24.7.2006 in which both the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 were found to be at par in terms of suitability for the post in question. The Selection Committee, therefore, sent both the names to the appointing authority, i.e., the Executive Council for its decision in the matter. The Executive Council in a meeting held on 19.8.2006 resolved to appoint the respondent No. 4 on the ground that the said respondent has a more meritorious record of academic performance. At this stage the writ petitioner had instituted a writ proceeding before this court registered and numbered as WP(C) No. 4189/06. The said writ proceeding was disposed of by this court on 13.9.2006 by holding that not only merit but also the opinion of the experts called for by the University and the experience of the candidates would be relevant factors for determining the suitability of the candidates for the post of Lecturer in Psychology. As this court found the decision of the Executive Council in favour of the respondent No. 4 to have been taken on the basis of merit alone, the matter was sent back to the Executive Council for a de novo consideration in the light of the observations of the court. The University accepted the aforesaid decision of the court and, thereafter, the Executive Council once again held its deliberations in the matter on 26.10.2006. Thereafter, the Executive Council, upon due consideration of the three relevant factors that were required to be taken into account as noted above, reiterated its earlier decision in favour of the respondent No. 4. Aggrieved, the petitioner is back before this court.

(3.) I have heard Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. L.P. Sarma, learned counsel for the University and Dr. Y.K. Phukan, learned senior counsel for the respondent No. 4.