The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 08.04.2009 rendered in WP (C) No. 2906/2008 setting aside his appoint­ment to the post of Lower Division Assistant (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'LDA') in the office of the Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department, North Lakhimpur. The annulment was as a consequence of a challenge to the selection process by the respond­ent No. 7 herein. The appellant was arrayed as respondent No. 7 in the writ proceeding.

2. We have heard Mr. R.C. Saikia, learned counsel for the appellant; Mr. B. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Water Resource Department, Govt. of Assam; Mr. P.S. Deka, learned State counsel and Mr. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the respondent No.7.

3. The process of filling up the aforemen­tioned post was initiated pursuant to the Of­fice Order bearing Memo No. A/10(C)/05-06/621-26 dated 27.2.2008 of the Execu­tive Engineer, North Lakhimpur Water Re­source Division, North Lakhimpur. A four member Selection Committee was also con­stituted thereby to administer the selection which was to be on the basis of a written test, viva-voce and typewriting test. The post was reserved for the Scheduled Tribe (P) candi­dates only. In this connection, the Executive Engineer, North Lkhirnrnr Water Resource Division, North Lakhimpur as the Member Secretary of the Selection Committee re­quested the District Employment Officer, Lakhimpur to send the names and particulars of 20 candidates for the post. On receipt of the list of such candidates as requested, call letters were issued to them including the par­ties in the fray fixing 18.5.2008 for written test etc. The call letter inter alia mentioned that the written test would comprise of Gen­eral English, General Knowledge and Math­ematics for 50 marks with the duration of 1½ hours. The written test was to be followed by interview and typewriting test.

4. In course of the written test it transpired that the same was for 100 marks instead of 50 marks as indicated in the call letter. How­ever, on the completion of the written test, on the very same day, viva-voce as well as typewriting test was held. The results of the selection were also announced on the same day and the appellant was shown to have been selected for appointment.

5. Situated thus, the respondent No.7 in the above factual backdrop initiated the writ proceeding assailing the selection process and the resultant appointment of the appellant in­ter alia on the ground that the same had been conducted in violation of the prescribed guidelines and was in reality a sham exercise in order to favour the appellant on extraneous considerations. That the written test was held for 100 marks instead of 50 marks and that the model of the question paper demon­strated total non-application of mind for se­curing the appointment of the appellant herein was also underlined.

6. This Court while issuing notice by the order dated 28.5.2008, in the interim, ob­served that any appointment on the basis of the impugned selection would be subject to further orders. Contending that in view of the above observation, he though appointed meanwhile tentatively, the same had not been regularized, the appellant filed an application seeking modification and/or vacation of the order dated 28.5.2008. In the said interim application registered as M.C. No. 34937 2008, the appellant pleaded the validity of the selection process and urged that as on a com­parative assessment of the performance of the participating candidates he had been ap­pointed having been adjudged to be the best, no interference as sought for therewith was warranted.

7. The respondent No.5 in the writ pro­ceeding i.e. the Executive Engineer, North Lakhimpur Water Resource Division, North Lakhimpur in his counter did not dispute that in terms of the decision taken by the Selec­tion Committee the written test was to be held for 50 marks with a duration of 1½ hours. The answering respondent stated that as per the decisi