Disposed

Gita Rani Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC2 Jun 2025WP(C)/4175/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Lecturer recruitment challenge where petitioner was first nominee but appointment was made conditional on NET/SLET clearance with lower pay. After she obtained a Ph.D., regularization proceedings were underway. The Court closed the writ petition as no surviving cause of action and directed authorities to complete regularization within two months.

What the court decided

AI extract

Gita Rani Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010013932014

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4175/2014

¶6

GITA RANI DAS

¶7

W/O- MR. MARGAON MASTON, R/O- USHA NAGAR, BYE LANE NO. 8, P.O. and P.S.- TEZPUR, DIST.- SONITPUR, ASSAM.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION HIGHER DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19.

¶11

3:UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI- 110002.

¶12

4:THE GOVERNING BODY TEZPUR COLLEGE REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT/SECY. P.O.- TEZPUR DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM.

¶13

5:THE PRINCIPAL/SECY. TEZPUR COLLEGE TEZPUR P.O.- TEZPUR DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P MAHANTA, MR.H DAS,MS.P SAHARIA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : MRS.K M TALUKDAR, MR. A CHAMUAH,SC, U G C,SC, EDU,MR.J K BAISHYA,GA, ASSAM,MR.M CHOUDHURY,MR.J P DAS

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶19

ORDER

¶20

03.06.2025

¶21

Heard Shri P Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri K Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department, Assam whereas Shri A Chamuah, learned counsel appears for the UGC.

¶22

2. In view of the subsequent developments and as also agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, there is no requirement to go deep in the facts and issues involved in this case. However, the facts of the case may be put in a concise manner.

¶23

3. An advertisement was published on 28.02.2001 for appointment of Lecturer in Economics in the Tezpur College. The petitioner, who claims to be eligible in all respects, had participated in the aforesaid recruitment process and was placed as the first nominee in the panel of candidates. Accordingly, a resolution was adopted by the Governing Body on 30.03.2001 to appoint the petitioner and the said resolution was forwarded to the authorities. However, vide the impugned order dated 15.09.2001, the appointment of the petitioner was made conditional on clearance of NET/SLET and until such time, the petitioner would be entitled to a pay scale of Rs. 8000/- per month. It is the case of the petitioner that such condition was imposed after the selection process was held and therefore does not have the sanction of law.

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

4. Shri Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the advertisement in question did not envisage any such condition, and therefore, the same would amount to changing the Rules after the recruitment process had come to an end.

¶26

5. On the other hand, Shri Gogoi and Shri Chamuah, learned counsel for the respondents, have submitted that such requirement is a statutory one. They have also clarified that the advertisement itself contains a specific clause of requiring all aspirants to be equipped with the latest UGC norms. They have further submitted that the requirement of NET/SLET or Ph.D. is a sine qua non for a regular appointment which is a consonance for maintaining a standard in the Higher Education.

¶27

6. The learned counsel for the rival parties have contended that in the meantime, the petitioner has obtained her Ph.D. Shri Mahanta, learned counsel has submitted that the said fact has been intimated to the authorities and the process is on to regularize the appointment of the petitioner. He has also placed before this Court a copy of the Certificate, dated 27.04.2023, issued to the petitioner by the Mahapurusha Srimanta Sankaradeva Biswavidyalaya.

¶28

7. In view of the aforesaid development, this Court is of the opinion that there is no existing cause of action requiring continuation or further adjudication of this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is closed with a direction to the respondent authorities to complete the process of conferring the regularity to the service of the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously and within an outer limit of 2 months from today.

¶29

8. It is needless to state that such regularization would only be from the date of acquiring the qualification/Ph.D.

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

9. A copy of the Certificate dated 27.04.2023 is made a part of the records.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Gita Rani Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Gita Rani Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeta Bhuyan Dutta and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Berpung Raja Basumatary @ Birpung Raja Basumatary Vs Anurag Goel, IAS and Anr.

Monida Khatun Vs M S Manivannan, IAS and 2 Ors.

Jaymati Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Askar Ali Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Prakash Deka Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.