Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010051632024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4058/2022 DR. MANJUSHA DASGUPTA W/O- DR. ASHIM PAUL R/O- PANIGAON DURGABARI P.O- PANIGAON ITACHALI DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782003 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS. REP. B THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HIGHER EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19 ASSAM 3:THE ASSAM UNIVERSITY SILCHAR REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788014 4:THE GAUHATI UNIVERSITY REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR DIST- JALUKBARI GUWAHATI Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM PIN-781014 5:THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI-110002 6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY GOVT. OF INDIA ANUSANDHAN BHAWAN 2 RAFI AHMED KIDWAI MARG NEW DELHI-110001 7:THE PRINCIPAL KAMRUP COLLEGE CHAMATA NALBARI ASSAM PIN-781306 8:THE PRINCIPAL MORAN COLLEGE P.O- MORANHAT CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785670 9:THE PRINCIPAL ARYA VIDYAPEETH COLLEGE GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN-781016 10:JUTHIKA DIHINGIA W/O DR SOURAVJYOTI BORAH R/O SATYAM APARTMENT BLOCK-A (3C) LANKESWAR PIN-781014 P.S- JALUKBARI DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. ------------ Page No.# 3/5 Advocate for : MR. B PURKAYASTHA Advocate for : SC HIGHER EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 01-04-2025 Heard Mr. B Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. PP Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7; Mr. JI Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 10; Mr. PJ Phukan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4; Mr. S Das, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2; Ms. N Kakoti, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3; Mr. R Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A Chamuah, learned counsel for the UGC. 2. The petitioner’s case is that she is an OBC candidate, having the educational qualification of M.Sc & P.hd in Biotechnology and M.Sc in Botany. As she was desirous of taking part in the selection process for filling up one post of Assistant Professor of Botany reserved for OBC/MOBC candidates pursuant to the Advertisement dated 26.02.2022, the petitioner submitted her application for the same. The petitioner was however not selected for the one post reserved for OBC/MOBC candidate, as the respondent No. 10, who was also an OBC/MOBC candidate, had been selected for the same. 3. The petitioner’s grievance is that the petitioner was not given 13 marks for being a P.hd, in terms of the Advertisement dated 26.02.2022. Besides the above, the petitioner is aggrieved with the Notification dated 02.02.2022 issued Page No.# 4/5 by the Academic Registrar, Gauhati University, which stated that M.Sc degree in Biotechnology could not be considered as a concerned subject for the post of Assistant Professor in Botany in the degree colleges affiliated to Gauhati University. 4. The petitioner has thus prayed that, not only should the Notification dated 02.02.2022 issued by the Academic Registrar, Gauhati University be set aside, but has also prayed that 13 marks should be awarded to the petitioner, to be added to the marks secured by the petitioner in the selection process for filing up the post of Assistant Professor in Botany. 5. Mr. PP Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 submits that in the selection process for filing up the post of Assistant Professor in Botany under the OBC/MOBC category, the writ petitioner secured 51 marks out of 100 marks, while the respondent No. 10 secured 66 marks. The respondent No. 10 was consequently selected for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Botany under the OBC/MOBC category. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 7. The facts of the case show that the petitioner and the respondent No. 10 both belong to the OBC/MOBC category. The consolidated statement of marks of the candidates, who applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Botany, pursuant to the Advertisement dated 26.02.2022, shows that the petitioner had secured 51 marks, while the respondent No. 10 had secured 66 marks. Even if 13 marks were added to the marks secured by the petitioner, the total marks of the petitioner would have been 64 marks, as against the 66 marks of the Page No.# 5/5 respondent No. 10. 8. In view of the reasons stated above, the petitioner cannot be selected for the post of Assistant Professor (OBC/MOBC) in Botany. As such, there is no ground for this Court to exercise it’s writ jurisdiction in this case. 9. The respondent authorities are accordingly directed to appoint the respondent No. 10 as Assistant Professor, Botany in Kamrup College, Chamata, Nalbari, as he has been selected for appointment in the selection process. 10. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant