The petitioner sought a declaration regarding the result of an interview for an assistant professor post. The respondent stated the petitioner had been selected, so the writ petition was closed without a final order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010110052021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3495/2021
MS MEGHNA CHOUDHURY
W/O- DIGANTA MADHAV GOSWAMI, H.NO. 18 (B) (FLAT 101), LAKHIMI NAGAR, BY LANE-1, P.O. BELTOLA, GHY-28
VERSUS
THE GUAHATI UNIVERSITY AND 3 ORS
GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR, GHY- , REP. BY THE VICE CHANCELLOR GAUHATI UNIVERSITY
2:THE REGISTRAR GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GHY-
3:THE CHAIRMAN
SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE POST OF ASSTT. PROFESSOR OF FOLKLORE RESEARCH DEPTT. GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GHY-14
4:THE CHAIRMAN EXECUTIVE COUNSEL GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GHY-1
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MAHANTA
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, G U
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
ORDER
03.11.2021
Heard Mr. D Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. PJ Phukan, learned counsel for the respondents in the Gauhati University.
By this writ petition, the petitioner sought for a direction to the respondent authorities for declaration of the result of the interview held on 14.03.2020 pursuant to an advertisement dated 12.06.2018 (Advertisement No.T/2018/4).
Mr. PJ Phukan, learned counsel for the respondent, Gauhati University makes a statement that in the meantime, the results have been declared. A further statement has been made that in fact the petitioner has been selected.
Mr. D Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the University authorities had informed the petitioner that further action on the result of the petitioner would be taken after the closure of the writ petition, and, therefore, a prayer is made that this writ petition be closed.
In view of the above statement, the writ petition stands closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
MS MEGHNA CHOUDHURY
THE GUAHATI UNIVERSITY
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
