Point of Law : A candidate has a right to be considered in the light of the existing Rules, which implies the Rules in force on the date when the consideration took place.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. B.K. Das, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1 and 2 and Mr.A. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the appointments of the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 to the post of Junior Assistant in D.H.S.K. Commerce College, Dibrugarh and also for a direction to the Respondents to grant marks to the Petitioner towards experience and to prepare a fresh select list for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant in the said college.

3. The facts of the instant case is that the Petitioner is a member of the other Backward Classes and has passed out the H.S.L.C. Examination in the year 1994. Thereafter in the year 1996 the Petitioner passed his H.S. (Arts) and finally completed his B.A. in the year 2000. The Petitioner also claims to have completed the E-Office Computer Course in the year 2008 and Diploma in Office Management(DOMC) Course in the year 2009. On 7/11/2007, the Petitioner joined as L.D. Assistant on temporary basis at a fixed pay of Rs.2,000/-per month on the basis of an appointment letter dated 5/11/2007 issued by the then Principal of D.H.S.K. Commerce College, Dibrugarh.

4. The Respondent No. 3 had issued an advertisement dated 9/3/2017 for filling up two posts of Junior Assistant in D.H.S.K. Commerce College, Dibrugarh. The Petitioner applied for the said post pursuant to the said advertisement. It is the Petitioner’ s case that on 2/2/2017, the Directorate of Higher Education had formulated certain guidelines for selection to the Grade – III posts. As per the said guidelines, 5 marks were earmarked for experience of work in similar capacities in Provincialised College/Government Department/Provincia-lised Secondary School, and the Selection Committee was to be constituted as per Rule 10 (B) of the Assam College Employees Provincialisation Rules, 2010. On the basis of the petitioner applying for the said post, he was issued a call letter dated 30/10/2017 asking him to appear in the written test to be held on 19/11/2017 with Roll No. JA-68. The Petitioner accordingly appeared. The Respondent No. 3 thereafter issued a letter dated 6/2/2019 asking him to appear for the computer test to be held on 3/3/2019. However, the Petitioner was not selected and the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were selected and appointed against the two posts of Junior Assistant. The Petitioner being aggrieved has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

5. The Respondent No. 2 filed an affidavit in opposition. In Paragraph 6 of the said affidavit in opposition, it was mentioned that the final selection to the post of Junior Assistant in D.H.S.K. Commerce College was mainly assessed under three heads, namely-(a) marks on academic qualification, (b) marks obtained in written test and (c) marks obtained in computer typing test by the candidates. On the basis of such assessment, it was mentioned that the Selection Committee prepared a comparative list of candidates, wherein the Respondent No. 4 secured a grand total of 73.5 as the highest marks amongst the candidates and the Respondent No. 5 secured 2nd position with a grand total of 72.5 marks. However, the Petitioner failed to get any place in the said selection list and it is on that basis the Selection Committee recommended the name of the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 for the post of Junior Assistant. In Paragraph No. 8 of the said affidavit in opposition, it has been mentioned that the guideline/notification dated 2/2/2017 on the basis of which the Petitioner has claimed his right in the writ petition, has already been superseded by a subsequent guideline/notification dated 29/4/2017 issued by the Office of the Directorate of Higher Education, Assam vide No. DHE/CE/Misc/341/2016/12. In terms with the