Dismissed

Nagen Ray v. the Assam State Electricity Board and Ors.

Gauhati HC11 Dec 2018WP(C)/6401/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the appointment of a private respondent to a post of Shahayak on grounds of seniority and experience. Court held it cannot interfere with the selection committee's assessment of suitability and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as no case was made out for interference with the respondent's appointment.

Nagen Ray Vs the Assam State Electricity Board and Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010008532010

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6401/2010

¶5

1:NAGEN RAY

¶6

SON OF LATE KRISHNA RAY VILL-HIALMARI P.O. UDALGURI, P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD and ORS REP. BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, APDCL, BIJULI BHAWAN, GUWAHATI-1 ASEB.

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.D F A AHMED

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, A S E B

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 11-12-2018

¶14

No one appears for the petitioner. Heard Ms. J. Ranjpipi, learned counsel for the APDCL.

¶15

In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the selection and appointment of the private respondent No. 6 to the post of Shahayak, on the ground that the petitioner is senior, more experienced and hence, his selection and appointment is arbitrary and illegal.

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

This petition is contested by the respondents by filing their affidavit-inopposition, in which it has been stated that the company had initiated the process for the post of Sahayak by holding an interview in which not only the petitioner but others were allowed to participate in the said recruitment process which included fitness test, practical test and interview. After undertaking the aforesaid exercise, the most suitable persons were appointed including the respondent No.6.

¶18

It has been stated that the petitioner was given the opportunity to take part in the said recruitment process in which his case was also considered. The selection was made by high level committee who after examining the performance of the candidates made the recommendation for appointment.

¶19

The only ground raised in this petition is that the petitioner is more experienced than respondent No. 6.

¶20

That is an areas in which this Court normally cannot go into, as it is for the competent selection committee or board to examine the suitability of the candidates.

¶21

Accordingly, this Court is of the view that no case has been made out for the interference with the respondent No. 6 on the aforesaid ground.

¶22

The present petition is dismissed, accordingly.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Nagen Ray v. the Assam State Electricity Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagen Ray v. the Assam State Electricity Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajit Sarki and 29 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Gunada Deori Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Sankaradeva Nethralaya Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Sailendra Bujarbaruah Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Kalyan Kalita Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Morangi Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Presiding Officer , Industrial Tribunal and Anr.