JUDGMENT

Michael Zothankhuma, J. - Heard Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Also heard Mr. A. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 and Mr. M. Khanikar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 9, whereas Mr. B. Chetry, learned counsel appears for the respondent No. 8.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved in not being selected for appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (UD) under the Government of Assam. The challenge made by the petitioner to his non-selection for the said post is that while he had secured 198.5 marks in the selection process, persons who secured lesser marks than the petitioner have been appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (UD). Further, as he had passed graduation in the second division, he was awarded 6 marks, while similarly situated candidates were awarded 6/7 marks.

3. The brief facts of the case is that pursuant to an advertisement dated 01.01.2010, inviting applications for filling up 98 vacancies in the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police (UD), the petitioner took part in the selection process. The petitioner secured 198.5 marks, which was higher