IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH), PRINCIPAL SEAT
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.
Sri Bhubaneswar Sarma – Petitioner
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by Secretary, Government of Assam, Dispur, General Administration Department and Ors. – Respondents
W.P(C) No.3029 of 2020
Decided On : 22-05-2024
Selection Process - Revenue Sheristadar - Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967 - 6(1), 8(iii) - The court examined the criteria for selection, the procedure for selection, and the assessment of inter se merit of the candidates. The court found that the selection committee considered the number of years of experience in the Revenue Branch as a valid criterion for selection, in line with the requirement prescribed under the Rules. The court held that it is not its function to scrutinize the relative merits of the candidates, and the employer is the best judge of the criteria required for selecting the best candidate for the job.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Supervisory Assistant, applied for the post of Revenue Sheristadar but was not selected. The petitioner alleged that the selection committee did not assess the inter se merit of the candidates and did not follow the prescribed norms, leading to the selection of a less qualified candidate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the selection committee's consideration of the number of years of experience in the Revenue Branch as a criterion for selection was valid and in line with the Rules. The court held that it is not its function to hear appeals over the decisions of the Selection Committees and to scrutinize the relative merits of the candidates.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the selection process for the post of Revenue Sheristadar was conducted in accordance with the prescribed norms and whether the selection committee's consideration of the number of years of experience in the Revenue Branch was a valid criterion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the employer is the best judge of the criteria required for selecting the best candidate for the job. The court also emphasized that it is not its function to scrutinize the relative merits of the candidates.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as the court found that the selection process was conducted in accordance with the prescribed norms and the consideration of the number of years of experience in the Revenue Branch as a criterion for selection was valid.
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner before this Court is presently serving as a Supervisory Assistant in the Deputy Commissioner Establishment, Nalbari, Assam. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he applied for selection and appointment to the post of Revenue Sheristadar and although he posses all necessary qualifications and satisfies all the norms and requirements he was not selected rather the private respondent No. 4 was selected and appointed. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that by Advertisement dated 05.07.2019, the post of Revenue Sheristadar in the amalgamated establishment of Deputy Commissioner, Nalbariwas advertised. In the said advertisement, qualification for the post has been prescribed is 15 years of service in any of the Deputy Commissioner Establishment, Assam and has experience in difference branches in General and Revenue Branch in particular. In response to the said advertisement, the petitioner having the requisite qualifications forwarded his candidature for due consideration. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the services of the petitioner and the private respondent No. 4 are governed under the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967. The said service comprises of several cadres including Supervisory Assistant and Revenue Sheristadar. The Rules prescribed that each of the categories of posts prescribed therein shall formed an independent cadre. The posts of Sheristadar was amended by Gazette Notification dated 25.08.1999 and was notified as Revenue Sheristadar. The qualification of the post has been prescribed as 15 years of service in any Deputy Commissioner Establishments and must have experience of working under different branches in the Department including Revenue Branch in particular. The post is a selection post and the selection is to be conducted by a selection Board comprising of four (4) members. The Secretary of the General Administrative Department is the Chairman, Commissioner of the concerned Division and Deputy Commissioner of the concerned District are Members and the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, General Administration (B) Department is the Secretary of the said Committee. The selection Board/Committee will examine the Annual Confidential Report and other relevant service particulars of the eligible candidates for assessment of merit. After due assessment, a list of names in the order of preference will be prepared and the same shall be forwarded to the Appointing Authorities. The Government of Assam by Notification dated 01.07.1999 has already informed that selection to the post of Revenue Sheristadar shall be strictly on merit.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner possessed all the necessary qualification and had more merit than the private respondent yet the private respondent was selected as the candidate for the post of Revenue Sheristadar by the selection committee over the writ petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the orders passed by the selection committee, he had applied under RTI and in the reply received, it is seen from the Minutes that although the Commissioner, Lower Assam Division is a Member of the committee but only one Section Officer to the Commissioner was present in the meeting which is in contravention with Rule 7 of the Assam Ministerial District Establishment (Amendment) Rules, 1999. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that although the selection to the post of Revenue Sheristadar was to be conducted strictly on merit, yet the selection committee did not assess the interse merit of the candidates and instead merely recommended the private respondent to the post of Revenue Sheristadar. It is submitted that for the relevant period, the petitioner had been awarded ‘Very Good’ for all the relevant years under consideration in his AC
Mukul Kumar Tyagi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Subodh Chintey Vs. State of Assam and Ors
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Chhabil Dass Agarwal
Ishwar Chandra Vs. Satyanarayan Sinha
Dalpat Abasaheb Solunke and ors. Vs. Dr. B.S. Mahajan and Ors
The selection committee's discretion in assessing candidates based on Annual Confidential Reports and service particulars is valid, and the writ court's role is to ensure lawful decision-making.
The court established that the criteria for promotion can include unpublished guidelines and that the Chief Justice has the authority to determine suitability for promotion, which may extend beyond t....
Selection for public employment must be based on clear, objective criteria, with courts intervening where arbitrary processes are evident.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the selection process for the post of Ayurvedic Medical Officer must be in accordance with the prescribed procedure, fair-play, and justice, a....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.