Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010187382025 2025:GAU-AS:11858-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/267/2025 1: JESMINA RAHMAN AND 22 ORS D/O. JAKIR HUSSAIN, VILL.- LOHAJANI, P/O. MORAGADADHAR, P/S. GOLAKGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI. 2: ANUPAMA DAS S/O. NOKA DAS VILL.- BIDYARDABRI PT-I P/O. BIDYARDABRI P/S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI PIN-783335 3: CHIRONJIT RAY S/O- PRODIP KR RAY R/O- VILL- DUMARDAHA PT IV P.O- BALAJAN P.S - GAURIPUR PIN -783331 DIST- DHUBRI 4: CHIRANJIT ROY S/O - NIRMAL CHANDRA ROY VILL- RAMNATHPARA P.O- KAMANDANGA P.S- TAMARHAT DIST-DHUBRI PIN-783332 5: OSMAN GANI S/O-RAHUL AMIN. VILL- PANIAKHAT P.O- DHULA P.S-DHULA DIST- DARRANG 6: SHAHANA BEGUM D/O- KAMAL UDDIN AHMED VILL- BAZARGHAT P.O-BAZARGHAT P.S - RATABARI PIN -788733 DIST- SRIBHUMI 7: SAHIDA KHATUN D/O- KAZINUR ISLAM VILL- TALOWAGAON P.O-SRINAGAR(HATIDHURA) P.S - TAMARHAT PIN -783332 DIST- DHUBRI 8: CHINTAMANI DAS D/O- LATE RAJANI DAS VILL- JAMTOLA P.O- JAMTOLA P.S - RANGIA PIN -781365 DIST- KAMRUP(RURAL) 9: KALIM ULLAH S/0- FAKOR UDDIN VILL-SALEHPUR P.O-BARAIGRAM P.S-PATHARKANDI Page No.# 2/5 PIN-788723 DIST-SRIBHUMI(KARIMGANJ) 10: TAHIR AHMED S/O-ABDUL MATIN R/O- - VILL- HULASHNAGAR P.O- ANIPUR P.S- RATABARI PIN-788734 DIST- SRIBHUMI (KARIMGANJ) 11: MAYURI SARKAR D/O-AJIT KUMAR SARKAR VILL-BISHKHOWA PART 1 P.O-BISHKHOWA P.S-GOLAKGANJ DIST-DHUBRI (ASSAM) PIN-783334 12: ARJIFA PARBIN D/O - ASHAN ALI AHMED VILL- KHORAGHAT P/O - BARKANDA P/S - BAGRIBARI DIST- KOKRAJHAR PIN- 783348 13: INDRAJIT DAS S/O - PRABIN KUMAR DAS TOWN- SORBHOG WARD NO 4 P.O. - SORBHOG P.S. - SORBHOG DIST- BARPETA PIN - 781317 14: WAHIDUT ZAMAN S/O- ABDUL KASHEM TOWN- BARPETA ROAD WARD NO 1 P.O- BARPETA ROAD P.S - BARPETA ROAD PIN -781315 DIST- BARPETA 15: BEGUM JOBEDA KHATUN D/O- LT ABDUR RASID VILL- HATIPOTA PT 2 PO AND PS- BILASIPARA DIST- DHUBRI PIN- 783348 16: TUMPA ROY D/O- AMULLYA KUMAR ROY VILL-SOUTH TOKRERCHORA PT -2 P.O AND P.S- GOLAKGANJ DIST- DHUBRI PIN-783334 17: SOLMAN ALOM S/O-ABDUS SALAM VILL AND PO-LAMAJUAR PS-BADARPUR DIST-SRIBHUMI(KARIMGANJ) PIN-788701 18: SEKANDER BADSHA S/O - RAHAM ALI VILL- 2 NO RIVER BLOCK PO- POCHAR CHAR PS- SOUTH SALMARA DIST- DHUBRI PIN-783127 19: PRONAY KR RAY S/O- UTTAM KR RAY VILL- DHORARGHAT PT II P.O- SAHEBGANJ P.S - GAURIPUR PIN -783331 DIST- DHUBRI 20: RINA AHMED D/O- KASHEM ALI VILLAGE - BHAKUAMARI P/O- ANANDA BAZAR P/S - SALBARI DIST- BAKSA PIN-781318 21: IMDADULLAH BARBHUIYA S/O- ALA UDDIN BARBHUIYA VILLAGE- VICHINGCHA PART-2 Page No.# 3/5 BARBHUIYA BHAVAN HOUSE NO-06 GUDAMGHAT ROAD P.O AND P/S-- HAILAKANDI DISTRICT--HAILAKANDI PIN-- 788155 22: ASRAFUL AHMED S/O SHAJAMAL AHMED VILL AND P.O. BHERALDI P.S BARPETA DIST- BARPETA PIN- 781309 23: JAHIDUL ALOM SARKAR S/O LT MUZAMMEL HUSSAIN SARKAR VILL- THAGRARPAR PART 1 P.O. KHALIPUR P.O. - DHUBRI DIST- DHUBR VERSUS 1: THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION, SECONDARY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECENDORY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-781019 For the Appellant(s) : Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, Advocate. : Mr. A. Hussain, Advocate. : Mr. K. Alom, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.J. Khataniar, Standing Counsel, Education (Secondary) Department for respondent Nos.1 & 2. – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 03.09.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) Heard Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Secondary) Department. The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 01.08.2025 of a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No.4197/2025 and other analogous writ petitions, who has rejected the claim of the appellants for being considered for recruitment on the ground that the certificate regarding the basic Page No.# 4/5 qualification touching on the eligibility of the appellants was acquired only after the cut-off date for depositing the applications for the purposes of consideration. The short issue, which arises in this appeal, is whether the appellants could have been allowed to cure the defects, especially in view of the scheme of the Examination, when at the time of verification, the documents had to be produced regarding eligibility. The submission raised on behalf of the appellants is not justified. It is trite that eligibility for participation in a recruitment process has to be determined with reference to the cut-off date stipulated in the advertisement, namely, the last date for submission of applications, unless the rules provide otherwise. The rationale is 2(two) fold: first, to ensure fairness and a level playing field by treating all aspirants alike; second, ensure administrative certainty so that the authority may freeze the field of eligibility on a given date. If candidates who were ineligible on the last date, are allowed to acquire qualification subsequently and yet participate, it would amount to conferring upon them an undue advantage, while others similarly placed but who refrained from applying, would stand unfairly excluded. This proposition has been laid down by Supreme Court in Mrs. Rekha Chaturvedi -Vs- University of Rajasthan & Ors. :: 1993 Supp. (3) SCC 168 and Ashok Kumar Sharma & Ors. -Vs- Chander Shekhar & Anr. :: (1997) 4 SCC 18. Though the appellants have secured better marks than other aspirants but unfortunately they did not have the eligibility on the last date of submission of the application form. Page No.# 5/5 The appellants had applied against an advertisement dated 26.12.2023 issued by the respondents. They were allowed to appear in the Examination subject to their having the requisite eligibility, which would have been verified at a later stage. The appellants were required to have B.Ed. Degree, which they had acquired only after the last date for submission of the application form on 20.11.2024. Considering this aspect of the matter, the learned Single Judge did not agree to allow the case of the appellants/writ petitioners. We do not find any illegality or perversity in the order for us to interfere. There is no merit in this appeal, the appeal stands dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant