JYOTIMA PHUKAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE material facts, which are not in dispute, and have given rise to the present writ petition, may, in brief, be set out as under : (i) THE Assam Tribune, a local English daily, in its issue, dated 03.12.2006, and the Dainik Janambhumi, a local Assamese daily, in its issue, dated 07.12.2006, carried advertisement inviting applications to fill up, for a period of two years, a post of lecturer, in the Department of Zoology, Dibru College, Dibrugarh. THE post, though sanctioned, was to carry fixed pay of Rs. 5,000/- and the applicants were to submit their respective applications within fifteen days from the date of publication of the advertisement. THE petitioner, who held requisite educational qualifications, applied for selection and appointment to the said post. THE petitioner was accordingly invited, for interview, which was held on 28.03.2007. Following the interview, the Selection Committee prepared a merit list. THE names, figuring in the merit list, read, in order of merit, thus : 1. Dr. (Ms) Jyotima Phukan 2. Dr. Manashi Dutta 3. Shri Jogendra Nath Das (ii) On the ground that the candidates, whose position in the merit list were first and second, had crossed the maximum upper age limit required for the post of lecturer in college, the Governing Body of the said college, in its meeting, held on 23.04.2007, resolved to recommend the name of Jogendra Nath Das, who was placed third, in the merit list, to the Director of Higher Education, Assam, for obtaining prior approval for appointment of the said candidate as a lecturer. THE relevant extracts of the proceedings of the Governing Body read as under : (iii) Having learnt about the fact that though she had been placed, in the merit list, in the first position, by the Selection Committee, the Governing Body had declined to recommend her name to the Director of Higher Education, Assam, for the purpose of appointment and had, instead of her name, recommended the name of the candidate, namely, Jogendra Nath Das, whose position was third in the merit list, the petitioner has come to this Court, with this writ petition, seeking, inter alia, a direction to the Governing Body of the said College to recommend for approval to the Director, Higher Education, Assam, the name of the writ petitioner for appointment to the said post of lecturer of Zoology.

(2.) I have heard Mr. A. M. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner, Mr. M. K. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5. I have also heard Mr. P. Gogoi, learned counsel, for the respondent No. 3, Mr. A. K. Goswami, learned Senior Counsel, for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7.

(3.) THE question, therefore, which really falls for determination, is this : whether the subsequent relaxation of the petitioner's age as has been done by the Government, on 18.04.2007, clothes the petitioner with the right to raise a claim that her name ought to have been recommended by the Governing Body for the purpose of obtaining approval.