Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Kamkholun Lhoujen, Son Of Paosei Lhoujen – Appellant
Versus
Gauhati High Court – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. selection process details and results (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding selection criteria (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's analysis on selection legality (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. court's orders regarding selection outcome (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. R. Bora, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. S. Sarma, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4; Mr. T. R. Gogoi, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.2 and Ms. B. Choudhury, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.5.
2. The petitioner has challenged the selection of the respondent No.5 vide the Select List published on 01.07.2024 and the subsequent appointment of the respondent No.5 to the post of the Office Peon in the Office of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Golaghat.
3. The facts involved in the instant proceedings is that on 14.08.2023, the Office of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Golaghat had issued an advertisement calling from eligible candidates for filling up of two posts of Office Peon. One post was reserved for Schedule Caste category and the other post was reserved for Schedule Trib
Recruitment processes must adhere to advertised criteria; changes post-advertisement violate principles of fairness and equality under Articles 14 and 16.
The court upheld the principle that a candidate failing to meet qualifying marks cannot claim selection, and natural justice requires hearing affected parties before altering appointments.
The selection process must be fair and transparent; systemic irregularities can invalidate the entire process, even if some candidates are innocent of wrongdoing.
Recruitment criteria cannot be altered after the selection process begins, as it violates principles of fairness and predictability under public service law.
The court upheld the validity of minimum qualifying marks in judicial appointments, affirming that candidates who do not meet these criteria lack standing to challenge the selection process.
The selection process for the post of Chowkidar was quashed due to unfair practices and violation of established norms, reaffirming that participation in a selection process does not confer a vested ....
The selection process for public employment must adhere to principles of fairness and transparency; failure to predefine marking criteria constitutes a violation of constitutional rights.
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
