THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
N.UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Mridul Hazarika, S/o- Mr. Jogen Hazarika And Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam, Rep. BY The Comm. And Secy. To The Govt. Of Assam, Health And Family Welfare Deptt And Ors. – Respondent
WP(C)/3286 Of 2023
Decided On : 06-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to laboratory technician selection process (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding eligibility and selection process (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. judicial findings on earlier petition outcomes (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. analysis of the selection process and procedures (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. denial of petitioners' challenge to selection validity (Para 13 , 15) |
| 6. writ petition dismissed (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
1. Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. AG, Assam appearing for the State.
2. The writ petitioner in the present petition has presented a challenge to the selection of the respondent Nos. 5 to 9 for appointment as Laboratory Technician against the vacant post advertised vide advertisement dated 19-02-2011.
3. The petitioner in the present proceeding had, in pursuance to the advertisement dated 19-02-2011 issued by the Principal, Tezpur Medical College and Hospital inviting applications for recruitment against 48 (forty eight) numbers of vacant posts of Laboratory Technician in his establishment, had submitted their respective candidature for the said post. The applications submitted by the petitioners being found to be confirming to the required eligibility criteria, they were called for appearing in an interview held for the purpose. On conclusion of the selection process, a select list came to be published wherein the names of the petitioners did not find mention. Accordingly, 44 (forty four) candidates whose name figured in the select list, came to be appointed against the advertised vacant posts of Laboratory Technician. The petitioners, herein, having come to learn that amongst the appointed persons there were many candidates who did not fulfill the eligibility criteria as set out in the advertisement dated 19-02-2011, assailed the appointment and selection of the ineligible candidates by way of instituting a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No. 6279/2018. The Coordinate Bench of this Court upon examining the contention raised by the parties to the proceeding, proceeded vide judgment and order dated 27-09-2022 to dispose of the said writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6279/2018 interfering with the appointment of the private respondents therein, who were found to be ineligible for such selection and appointment as Laboratory Technician in pursuance to the advertisement dated 19-02-2011. The Coordinate Bench further directed the respondent authorities to fill up the vacancies now arising by recasting the select list in question, on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates in the selection process and to appoint those candidates who are found to be eligible on the basis of the qualification as per the advertisement dated 19-02-2011, including the petitioners, herein. The judgment and order dated 27-09-2022 was assailed by the candidates whose appointments now came to be interfered with before the Division Bench of this Court by way of instituting a writ appeal being W.A. No. 345/2022. The said writ appeal was disposed of vide order dated 01-11-2022 permitting the appellants, therein, to withdraw the said writ appeal to approach the learned Single Judge by way of filing a review application. The review application being Review Petition No. 168/2022 was instituted, however, the same was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 25-11-2022. The candidates whose selection was now interfered with, assailed the judgment and order dated 27-09-2022 as well as the review order dated 25-11-2022 by way of instituting a writ appeal being W.A. No. 23/2023. The said writ appeal upon consideration was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 28-02-2023.
Upon conclusion of the said proceeding, the Principal-cum-Chief Superintendent, Tezpur Medical College and Hospital, Tezpur after recasting of the select list, proceeded to publish a select list of 05 (five) candidates, i.e.
The court affirmed that petitioners, having previously accepted the selection process, were barred from later contesting the methodology due to principles of waiver and acquiescence, despite alleging....
Selection process legality cannot be challenged after participation without evidence of misconduct or unfairness.
The court established that merit lists for public appointments must strictly adhere to the prescribed guidelines, and any deviation that introduces favoritism or lacks transparency is subject to judi....
Employment and Service matter - Grade-IV employees - Selection process - Selection process is not subject matter of challenge in absence of any grounds, subsequent action of issuing appointment order....
Selection processes must be fair and transparent, with candidates having no vested rights if they participated without protest, respecting merit-based adjustments among categories.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to intervene in the selection process to rectify irregularities and ensure that only eligible candidates are considered for t....
Court does not sit in appeal over decision of Selection Committee.
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.