GUWAHATI, India, July 29 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on June 30:

1. Heard Mr. S.A.Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners 1.Rupam Handique and 2. Debasish Nath who have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing of writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ against the Advertisement dated 30.12.2023 being Advertisement No. HRAQ/REC-WP-B/2023-81.

2. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Devajit Saikia appears for the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that through the aforesaid Advertisement they have applied for the post of BGE 12023 and they are aggrieved by the final result of the aforementioned Advertisement dated 06.06.2025. The petitioners were not selected as the observation was that they had 'no past relevant work experience.'

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have successfully passed the CBT Test and the petitioners have obtained marks much higher than the cut-off marks i.e. the petitioner No.1 secured 77 and the petitioner No. 2 secured 78 out of 70. Furthermore, the petitioners have sufficient experience which has been mentioned in paragraph 10 of the writ petition. It is submitted that the petitioner No. 1 has more than 5 years of experience whereas the petitioner No. 2 has 3 years of experience.

5. The learned Senior counsel for Oil India Limited has raised objection against the petitioners' prayer for holding two posts in abeyance as the petitioners results have been correctly declared by the Oil India Limited. The petitioners do not have sufficient experience in the relevant field which pertains to drilling in the oil filed. The petitioners' experience is much less than 3 years and the work experience is related to administration and disaster management which does not fall within the criteria of the Advertisement. It is further submitted that this petition is not maintainable as adversely affected parties have not been impleaded as necessary parties in the writ petition.

6. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that as the petitioners were selected and qualified for CBT they ought to have been selected as successful candidates.

7. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within 04 (four) weeks.

8. As learned Senior Counsel Mr. Debajit Saikia appears for the respondent No. 2, 3, 4 and 5 and Ms. A.Phukan, learned CGC accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.1, no formal notice need be issued to the respondents. Extra copies be furnished.

9. However, it is made clear that selection process undertaken by OIL shall be subject to final outcome of the writ petition.

10. List after 04(four) weeks.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.