Back
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Pranjal Pratim Goswami, S/o. Ramesh Chandra Goswami – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Through- The Secretary, To The Government Of Assam, Handloom, Textiles And Sericulture Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.) :
Both these writ petitions being connected wherein similar reliefs have been prayed, the same are taken up for analogous hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. As per the facts projected, the petitioners have the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Sericulture Demonstrator under the Directorate of Sericulture, Assam.
3. As per the Rules holding the field namely, the Assam Sericulture Technical and Miscellaneous (Non Gazetted) Service Rules, 2008, Rule 5 (3) lays down the eligibility criteria for the candidates and the petitioners claim to have fulfilled all such eligibility criteria. To be specific, the Rule contemplates as follows:
or
(b) HSSLC (Science) examination passed or equivalent with one year Certificate Training Course from Sericultural Training Institute, Titabor, Jorhat from 1997-98 onwards batch.
4. A recruitment drive for the aforesaid post was made by an advertisement dated 01.03.2023. The age however was stipulated to be in the range of 18
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the selection based on interview alone is permissible, and there is no rule of thumb for the weightage of marks for interview, as it varies fr....
The court affirmed the authority to modify recruitment procedures under established rules, recognizing urgency and valid administrative discretion despite changes in selection criteria.
It is settled law that a person who consciously takes part in process of selection cannot, thereafter, turn around and question method of selection and its outcome.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment must be consistent and cannot be altered after the process has commenced, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Amended Rules of 1962 mandate that interview marks in public examinations cannot exceed 10% of total marks to ensure fair and transparent selection processes, reaffirming principles of constitutional....
The court affirmed the authority of recruitment committees to establish cut-off marks post-examination, provided it serves the objective of selecting qualified candidates.
Proficiency in Hindi or English cannot be adjudged through multiple choice questions, and no legal right accrued to demand a bilingual question paper.
The court clarified that subject-wise qualifying marks cannot be enforced post-examination as it contradicts the established selection rules, emphasizing the necessity for procedural clarity and comp....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
