GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER FOR TAPASH BHARADDWAJ AND ANR V/S THE GOVT OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. CASE

GUWAHATI, India, June 7 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on May 7:

1. Heard D. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. T. R. Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1. I have also heard Mr. H. K. Das, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. M. Kalita, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4.

2. The petitioners herein who are the Grade-IV employees working under the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar had assailed the appointment of the respondent No.4 to the post of Jarikarak/Process Server in the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar.

3. The ground on which the petitioners have approached this Court is that the respondent No.4 could not have been brought within the zone of consideration in terms with the advertisement dated 02.01.2024 inasmuch as the respondent No.4 was not a Grade-IV employee working under the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar on the date on which the advertisement was issued.

4. To ascertain the merits of the case of the petitioners, this Court would like to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of the instant petition.

5. The respondent No.2 herein had issued an advertisement dated 02.01.2024 inviting applications from eligible Grade-IV employees working under the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar having minimum educational qualification of Graduation for filling up of vacant post of Jarikarak/Process Server in the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar.

6. Pursuant to the said advertisement, the selection board i.e. the respondent No.3 conducted a selection process and in the said selection process, found the respondent No.4 to have obtained the highest marks and as such the respondent No.4 was appointed.

7. Be that as it may, it is relevant to take note of that even in the Minutes of the selection proceedings, it has been duly reflected that the respondent No.4 was a contractual appointee. This Court has also taken note of the gradation list of Grade-IV staffs of the District and Sessions Judge, Sivasagar as on 01.01.2024 wherein also, the respondent No.4 does find his name in the said list.

8. Pursuant to the said selection proceedings, vide an order dated 21.03.2024, the respondent No.4 was duly appointed as a Jarikarak/Process Server and it is under such circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=bzPoyUlszYLCUcCpirIpqLQ7RJEETMQ2l0tI8cl6Z79jQ4CMK664%2FbdLbFZHWCDM&caseno=WP(C)/2466/2024&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010090772024&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.