Allowed

Bhola Nath College, Dhubri v. Rahul Amin Bepari and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Feb 2021I.A.(Civil)/177/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Article 226(3), the Gauhati High Court vacated an interim stay order dated 21.12.2020 in a connected writ petition regarding assistant professor selection. The stay was lifted because the respondent-writ petitioner failed to file for reconsideration within 14 days despite notice.

What did the court decide?

The interim order dated 21.12.2020 passed in WP(C) No. 5578/2020 is automatically vacated and ceased to exist. The I.A.(C) stands allowed. The respondent-writ petitioner is advised to prefer an applic

Bhola Nath College, Dhubri Vs Rahul Amin Bepari and… — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010011992021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/177/2021

¶5

¶6

WP(C) No. 5578/2020

¶7

BHOLA NATH COLLEGE, DHUBRI DHUBRI, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL AND SECRETARY , DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM

¶8

2: PRINCIPAL BHOLANATH COLLEGE DHUBRI PO AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM

¶9

3: SELECTION COMMITTEE

¶10

CONSTITUTED BY THE BHOLANATH COLLEGE DHUBRI FOR INTERVIEW HELD ON 10.12.2020 FOR SELECTION OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY IN BN COLLEGE DHUBRI REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL PO AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSA

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

RAHUL AMIN BEPARI AND 2 ORS.

¶13

S/O M U BEPARI, RESIDENT OF LAKHIMARI, DIST DHUBRI ASSAM, 78334

¶14

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6

¶16

3:DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 1

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C KEYAL Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HIGHER EDU

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK ORDER

¶21

15-02-2021

¶22

Heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned counsel for the applicant.

¶23

It is stated at the Bar that the counsel for the respondent No.1/writ petitioner is out of station. However, the cause list does not reflect his name in the leave note.

¶24

Heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Higher Education Department for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

¶25

The authorities of Bhola Nath College, Dhubri on 03.09.2020 issued an advertisement for the post of Assistant Professor in the subject of Chemistry in the said College reserved for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) as per Roster Point No.9. The selection for the said post was held on 10.12.2020. The respondent No.1/writ petitioner along with other appeared in the interview. Finding that the respondents in the Bhola Nath College, Dhubri during the selection process followed the procedure of the Office Memorandum in the Higher Education Department dated 25.11.2020, whereas in the advertisement dated 03.09.2020, the college authority specified that Educational Qualification and Selection procedure will be as per Government Office Memorandum No. AHE.407/2017/44 dated 08.11.2018, the petitioner being aggrieved preferred the connected WP(C) No.5578/2020.

¶26

While issuing notice to the respondents in said WP(C) No.5578/2020, the Court by order dated 21.12.2020, observed that the Guideline that was in force when the vacancy had arisen, will be applicable and not the subsequent Guidelines and accordingly, stayed the further process of the said advertisement dated 03.09.2020, issued by the said College, until further order.

¶27

Against the said ex-parte order, the authorities of said Bhola Nath College, Dhubri,

¶28

Page No.# 3/4

¶29

respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the connected WP(C) No.5578/2020, preferred this application under Article 226 (3) of the Constitution of India praying for vacation of the said stay order dated 21.12.2020, passed in the connected WP(C) No.5578/2020.

¶30

The applicant’s contention is that they filed a Caveat on 16.12.2020, which was not brought to the notice of the Court by the Registry. It is also placed before the Court that a Corrigendum was issued by the College authority on 29.11.2020 and published the same in the newspaper notifying that pursuant to the said advertisement dated 03.09.2020 and 07.10.2020, the Selection for the posts as advertised shall be held as per Government Office Memorandum No.AHE.407/2017/54 dated 25.11.2020.

¶31

The respondent No.1/writ petitioner knowing it well about the same, participated in the Selection process that was held on 10.12.2020 and appeared before the Selection Committee of said Bhola Nath College, Dhubri.

¶32

It is also seen that this application has been filed on 21.01.2021 under Article 226 (3) of the Constitution of India, furnishing a copy of the same on the counsel for the writ petitioner on 05.01.2021. However, the respondent No.1/ writ petitioner inspite of receiving of the same, neither submitted any application for listing the matter within time, nor submitted any application for reconsideration of the stay order dated 21.12.2020, passed in said WP(C) No. 5578/2020 afresh after expiry of 14 days from the date of filing of this application by the applicant on 21.01.2021 or from the date of receiving of copy of this application on 05.01.2021.

¶33

In view of the above and in view of Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India, the interim order dated 21.12.2020, passed by the Court in the connected WP(C) No.5578/2020 automatically stands vacated and ceased to exist.

¶34

Accordingly, this I.A.(C) stands allowed.

¶35

However, the respondent No.1/writ petitioner of WP(C) No. 5578/2020 may prefer any such application for reconsideration of his stay order.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Page No.# 4/4

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Bhola Nath College, Dhubri v. Rahul Amin Bepari and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhola Nath College, Dhubri v. Rahul Amin Bepari and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yasmin Sultana Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Raju Saikia and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Bhubaneswar Nath Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Makibur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Md. Mintu Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Kasim Ali Ahmed Vs Preetom Saikia