##PAGE1##

Page No.# 1/8

GAHC010269682025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WA/5/2026

MITRA CHAKRABORTY (KANU)

W/O- DULAN CHAKRABORTY,R/O HOUSE NO. 15, 4TH FLOOR NILANJANA APARTMANT, AMBICAPATTY, SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-

788004

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 15 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GHY-6

2:THE LEGAL REMEMBRANCER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI

ASSAM PIN-781006.

3:THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

GAUHATI HIGH COURT AT GUWAHATI ASSAM

PIN-781001

4:THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR

SILCHAR ASSAM PIN-788001

5:THE SELECTION BOARD

##PAGE2##

Page No.# 2/8

CONSTITUTED PURSUANT TO THE ADVERTISEMENT DATED 10-08-2022 C/O THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

PIN-788001

6:SHRI SUPRAJIT BARMAN ST (P) CANDIDATE AND EXCESS SELECTEE/APPOINTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF

C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

7:SRI INDRAJIT PAUL OBC CANDIDATE AND EXCESS SELECTEE/APPOINTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF

C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

8:SMT SUMANA PAUL OBC WOMEN CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF

C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

9:SRI LITON DEB LAT PLACED GEN/UR CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV

STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

10:MR RAJESH KHESRA CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

##PAGE3##

Page No.# 3/8

11:IMDADUL HAQUE MAZUMDER U R CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

12:SRI BIRU BORAIK OBC CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM

PIN-788001

13:SRI BIRABAHU SINHA OBC CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

14:SRI RATISH DAS SC CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

15:SRI PRIYO PAMEI ST CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF

C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-788001

16:SRI HANNAN UDDIN CHOUDHURY EWS CANDIDATE AND SELECTEE TO POST OF GRADE-IV STAFF C/O ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE

CACHAR SILCHAR

ASSAM PIN-78800

##PAGE4##

Page No.# 4/8

For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. Darak Ullah, Advocate Mr. Sabrish Ahmed, Advocate

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. T.J. Mahanta, Sr. Advocate SC, GHC

Ms. P. Sarma, Advocate Mr. S. Baruah, Jr. GA, Assam

B E F O R E –

–

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

06.04.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

An advertisement was issued by the establishment of District &

Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar, for filling up of 11 Grade-IV posts, in the year 2022.

The select list was prepared, wherein one Liton Deb (Unreserved category candidate) was placed at serial No. 4 in the merit list and was appointed against one of the posts meant for unreserved category, who

joined duty in the year 2024.

In the year 2025, the appellant in the present case filed a writ petition [WP(C) 1097/2025] before the High Court alleging that 30% horizontal reservation for PWD and woman candidates had not been computed properly in preparation of the select list. Her claim before the

th writ Court was that she had scored 74 marks and was ranked 19 in merit and, therefore, she should have been appointed against one of the 4

posts meant for the Unreserved category candidates.

The prayer made by the appellant in the writ petition was not acceded to for two reasons, namely, that though the appellant had

##PAGE5##

Page

Click Here to Read the rest of this document