ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.

1. Heard Mr. J. Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P. Borah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 and Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned Standing Counsel for the Higher Education Department.

2. The petitioner, who claims to have a good academic record, was serving as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Sanskrit in the Gurucharan College, Silchar. Prior to that, she was serving as an Ad-Hoc lecturer in the Department of Sanskrit at MNC Balika Mahavidyalaya, Nalbari.

3. An advertisement dated 04.07.2015 was issued by the Principal-cum-Secretary of Nalbari College, which was published in the daily English newspaper namely "The Assam Tribune" dated 04.07.2015, wherein applications were invited from eligible candidates, amongst others, for filling up the vacant sanctioned post of Assistant Professor in Sanskrit in Nalbari College, Assam. As per the advertisement, the last date of receipt of applications was fixed fifteen days after the date of publication of the advertisement. The required qualification etc was also prescribed in the advertisement itself. According to the petitioner, on the date when the advertisement was issued, the Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012 laying down the guidelines for selection of Assistant Professor in provincialised colleges was in force. The said Office Memorandum stipulates the procedure of adding the percentage of marks secured by a candidate in HSLC.HS/PU, Degree, PG, B.Ed/M.Ed, Ph.D etc, so as to arrive at the total marks that a candidate may secure.

4. The petitioner accordingly offered her candidature against the aforesaid advertisement and she was issued a call letter bearing No. NO/NC/Interview/Call Letter/Sanskrit/2015/415 dated 19.09.2015 requiring her to appear in an interview, which was scheduled to have been held on 04.10.2015. The petitioner accordingly appeared in the interview and could learn that the Selection Committee also awarding certain marks for the oral interview that the candidates were subjected. The petitioner was aggrieved inasmuch as the Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012, which held the field when the advertisement was issued, did not provide for holding any interview and as such according to the petitioner, the procedure adopted by the college authorities in holding the interview was de-hors the procedure prescribed by the Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012. In the aforesaid premises, this writ petition has been preferred for setting aside the selection that was held on 04.10.2015 with a further direction to hold a fresh selection strictly as per the procedure laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 25.06.2012.

5. The college authorities on the other hand, filed an affidavit in opposition dated 25.01.2016, wherein in paragraph-6, a stand has been taken that they are bound by the circulars issued by the Government from time to time and on the date when the interview was held on 04.10.2015, the Office Memorandum dated 14.08.2015 was holding the field. According to the respondent college authorities, the Office Memorandum of 14.08.2015 did provide for the procedure of holding an interview for 20 marks and accordingly the respondent authorities seek to justify the holding of the interview on 04.10.2015.

6. The State respondents through the Director of Higher Education, Assam also filed an affidavit dated 14.03.2018, wherein in paragraph-6, a stand had been taken that as on 04.10.2015, when the interview was held, the Office Memorandum dated 14.08.2015 was in force. But in paragraph-5, another stand had been taken by the Director of Higher Education that in the selection process that was held on 04.10.2015 including the interview, one Ms Barnali Borthakur was selected as the first candidate in order of merit.

7. But, it has also been taken note of that the said statement in paragraph-5 of the Director was merely on the basis of the record that were available with the Director, but there is