MAUSUMI BORAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. T.C. Khatri, senior advocate assisted by Mr. P. Mahanta, advocate for the petitioner and Mr. B.J. Ghosh, learned State counsel, Assam.

(2.) THE petitioner's pleaded case in brief is that she together with others had responded to the advertisement dated 15.5.2008 issued by the respondent No. 1, Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur, Tezpur, Assam (as the respondent No. 2) for appointment amongst others against 24 posts of Junior Assistant in the amalgamated establishment of the said respondent. She appeared in the written test held on 26.10.2008, having been allotted Roll No. 1229 along with several other candidates and was declared to be successful, the results of the written test having been declared on 20.11.2008. In the unreserved category of candidates her roll number appeared at Sl. No. 6. She was, thereafter, called for attending the type test and the computer test, which she did on 28.11.2008, subsequent whereto she also participated in the viva -voce. According to the petitioner, the interview was held on 10.12.2008, 11.12.2008, 12.12.2008 and 29.12.2008 and on the very next date, i.e., 30.12.2008 the impugned order of appointment was issued.

(3.) THE respondent No. 2 in his affidavit, while categorically denying the charges laid against the selection process, has refuted the contention that appointments on the culmination of the selection process, had been made to the post of chainman as alleged. While admitting that the post of Junior Assistant and Chainman are encadered in Grade -Ill and Grade -IV of the service respectively, the answering respondent has underlined that the impugned appointments have been made on the basis of merit -cum -performance, having regard to the 100 Point Roster, backlog of vacancies as well as reservations, inter alia, for physically handicapped and woman candidates. While asserting that the order dated 20.11.2008 declaring the results of the written examination was not the final merit list and that the same only disclosed the short listed candidates identified for the type test and the computer test, the deponent has further averred that where as the type test and computer test was held on 28.11.2008 and 29.11.2008, oral interview was conducted on 10.12.2008, 11.12.2008 and 12.12.2008. The petitioner's claim of having secured 6th position in order of merit has denied. The break up of marks for the various segments of the selection has been indicated as (1) Written Test - 100, (2) Type Test - 20 (English - 10 and Assamese - 10), Computer test only for preference and (3) Viva -voce - 50.