Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010099582022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3457/2022 SK SAHIDUR RAHMAN @ SAHIDUR RAHMAN SON OF SK. ABDUL MANNA, R/O- VILL- BAKRIHAWAR PART-VIII, P.S.- ALGAPUR, DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788101. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:STATE LEVEL POLICE RECRUITMENT BOARD ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MADHAB DEVPUR REHABARI GUWAHATI- 781008 GROUND FLOOR OF APHC BUILDING. 3:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HAILAKANDI PIN- 788151 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN, MR F Z MAZUMDER,MR. N ISLAM,R ALI,MR. M H SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 07.03.2025 Heard Mr. F.Z. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate for the State.. 2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No. 2 had published an advertisement dated 25.04.2018 with an addendum dated 19.12.2019 inviting online application from intending candidates for filing up vacant posts of Constable in armed and unarmed Branch of Assam Police and the petitioner applied for the said post against OBC/MOBC Category. After submission of the application, the petitioner had called for Physical Eligibility Test (PST) on 19.02.2021. During the physical test, documents were examined and marks were awarded to the petitioner and mark-sheet was also issued to him and the petitioner found that although the petitioner had shown his Computer Certificate and ITI Certificate to the concerned officer, no marks were awarded against the said certificates. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is entitled to get 3 makes for two years National Trade Certificate from ITI and 2 marks for his computer application certificate but the marks have not been awarded without assigning any reason and the petitioner got only 60 marks out of 100 marks. If those marks were added, the petitioner would have secured 65 marks. 4. It is submitted that after having found no marks were given to him Page No.# 3/4 against the said certificates, the petitioner submitted a complaint dated 01.03.2021 to the Superintendent of Police, Hailakandi but no response was forthcoming. In the meanwhile, the final selection list were published on 12.05.2022. The petitioner having not been selected, he submitted another representation dated 13.05.2022 to the Superintendent of police, Hailakandi but the same has also not been unattended to. It is submitted that a similarly situated candidate, who was selected, was awarded the 5 marks for the said certificates, whereas the petitioner was not awarded any marks on his certificates. Being aggrieved, the writ petition has been filed. 5. The learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate submits that he has no instructions. He however submits that the matter may be examined by the respondent Departments and if any representation is found to be pending the same can be directed to be disposed of. The counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the contention of the respondents. 6. Considering the limited prayer of the writ petitioner and also taking into considerations the fact that the writ petitioner has preferred a representation dated 13.05.2022 which is stated to be pending before the Superintendent of Police, Hailakandi and also taking into consideration the submissions made at the Bar, this Court is of the view that at this stage the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to expeditiously consider and dispose of the representation which was filed by the writ petitioner dated 13.05.2022 stated to be pending before the respondent No. 3 and pass a speaking order thereon. Page No.# 4/4 7. The representation stated to be filed shall be disposed of within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and any order that is passed, copy thereof will be served on the writ petitioner. 8. With the above observations the writ petition stands dispose of. No order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant