Candidate eligibility must be satisfied by the application cutoff date; subsequent qualifications cannot be considered in selection processes.

JUDGMENT :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

1.Heard Mr. N. Dhar and Mr. B. K. Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Das, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Also heard Mr. K. Phukan, learned Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5. None appeared for the respondent Nos. 6, 7 & 8.

2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the proceeding/report, dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure-22), of Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhaya Adarsha Mahavidyalaya, at Eraligool, Sribhumi, erstwhile Karimganj district; regarding selection of respondent No. 8, for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor of Bengali in the said college and also the Governing Body Resolution No. 13, dated 30.08.2023 (Annexure-23), in approving the selection of the respondent No. 8, for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor of Bengali in the said college; and also the impugned order, dated 02.11.2024 (Annexure-27), passed by the Director of Higher Education, Assam; and further, prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, to the Director of Higher Education, Assam, respondent No. 2, to confer appointment to the petitioner in the post of the Assistant Professor in the Bengali Department at Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhaya Adarsha Mahavidyalaya at Eraligool, Sribhumi, with all the service benefits within the time specified by this Court.

Background Facts:-

3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under-

“The Principal of Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhaya Adarsha Mahavidyalaya at Eraligool, Sribhumi, erstwhile Karimganj district; had issued an advertisement, dated 20.07.2023, for appointment in the post of Assistant Professor of Bengali language of the said college, reserved for the ‘Persons with Disabilities’ (in short, PwD) candidates. Pursuant to the said advertisement, dated 20.07.2023, the petitioner had submitted her application and accordingly, an interview for the same was held on 29.08.2023; and pursuant to the call letter, dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure-10), received by the petitioner, she appeared in the said interview. Thereafter, the Selection Committee prepared the Consolidated Marking Statement, dated 29.08.2023, of the candidates and in the said statement, it is stated that the petitioner is not eligible for selection as the Ph.D. degree of the petitioner is allegedly not in the concerned subject, as per Directorate of Higher Education guidelines; even though, there is no such guideline that was allegedly issued by the Directorate of Higher Education, Assam (DHE, hereinafter); and the said resolution of the Selection Committee is also silent in respect of the candidature of Smti. Jayanti Choudhury, the respondent No. 8 herein, regarding her eligibility for selection to the said post.

Thereafter, the Selection Committee selected the respondent No. 8, who scored the lowest marks in the selection process, in spite of her being not qualified for appointment to the said post, in contravention to the Government Guidelines, dated 24.01.2022, in view of the violation of the Statutory Rules and in spite of being over-aged; as her date of birth is 14.08.1990, as per the Admit Card, dated 05.03.1996, issued to her by the Secondary Education Board of Assam.

It is also the contention of the petitioner