Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010183472023 2026:GAU-AS:4083 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/514/2023 MONOJ SAIKIA AND 14 ORS S/O- CHANDRA SAIKIA, VILL.- MEKHELI GAON, P.O. BONGAON, P.S. MAJULI KAMALABARI, DIST. MAJULI, ASSAM, PIN- 785110 2: JHARNA BARUAH SAIKIA W/O- CHANDRAMONI SAIKIA VILL- MILANPUR SAIKIA CHUBURI P.O. DIPOTA P.S. TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784150. 3: SMT. RICHA BORGOHAIN W/O- AMIYO KUMAR GOGOI VILL- PITHAGHAT P.O. URIAMGHAT P.S. BORPATHAR PIN- 785601 DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM 4: NITUMONI DOLEY D/O- UDON CH. DOLEY VILL.- KEMI P.O. LEKU P.S. JONAI PIN- 787060 DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM 5: JUTIKA DEVI D/O- BASISTHA NATH VILL.- BARATI Page No.# 2/6 P.S. THELAMARA P.O. GHATUA PIN- 784149 DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM 6: TANIMA MECH D/O- TOLON CH. MECH VILL.- NOBIL PATHER PIN- 784506 P.O. NEPALI BASTI P.S. MISSAMARI DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM 7: SMT. SUDESHNA BHUYAN W/O- DEBASIS BORAH VILL.- BORIGAON P.O. AND P.S. GOHPUR PIN- 784168 DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM 8: PRATISHA KAKATI D/O- BASANTA KAKATI VILL.- PUKHURIPARA P.O. AND P.S. NAGARBERA PIN- 781126 DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM 9: RAJDEEP HAZARIKA S/O- LATE KRISHNA HAZARIKA VILL.- GOSAIPATHER NO. 2 P.O. AND P.S. BIHPURIA PIN- 784161 DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 10: SIKHAMONI DUTTA D/O- RAJEN DUTTA VILL.- LUKUMAI GAON P.O. HALODHIBARI P.S. DERGAON DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785618. Page No.# 3/6 11: PORASHMONI PUJARI S/O- LATE HITNATH PUJARI VILL.- AND P.O. KENDUGURI P.S. BIHPURIA PIN- 784161 DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 12: ALPANA DUTTA D/O- RUPESWAR DUTTA VILL.- JARITUP P.S. LAKHIPUR P.O. AZAD PIN- 787031 DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 13: RUJI KONWAR C/O- DULEN NATH VILL.- MODARGURI P.O. AZAD P.S. PANIGAON PIN- 787031 DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 14: PINKI DEVI C/O- GAJENDRA NATH VILL. AND P.O. KHOGA P.S. PANIGAON PIN- 787052 DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 15: MONALISA GOGOI C/O- TILESWAR GOGOI VILL.- KAKADONGA P.S. NAMKHEATOWUL P.S. DERGAON DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785626 VERSUS NARAYAN KONWAR, IAS AND ANR THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 Page No.# 4/6 2:SMT. SURANJANA SENAPATI ACS DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M H ANSARI, MR. S ALIM Advocate for the Respondent : MR B KAUSHIK, MR. U SARMA(R-2),MR B KAUSHIK (R- 2),MR. D SAIKIA(R-2),MR S NEOGI BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 20.03.2026 1. Heard Mr. MH Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The present application is filed assailing willful and deliberate violation of this court’s order dated 31.05.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 3054/2023. 3. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of in terms of the observation made at paragraph No. 33 of the judgment & order (oral) dated 21.06.2022 passed in WP(C) 1040/2022 and other connected cases. 4. A comparison was raised in the aforesaid proceeding as regards distribution of marks to be adopted in selection process provided by UGC. 5. In the aforesaid order at paragraph 32 and 33, the following observations were reordered: “32. Secondly, by applying the same law to two classes of people, Page No.# 5/6 i.e. one class of candidates who were subjected to a stricter evaluation in the qualifying examinations and another class who were subjected to a more liberal method of evaluation, the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India would be violated. 33. Without expressing any view on the aforesaid issue as regards the disadvantageous position that the candidates who acquired their qualification at an earlier period of time may face, we provide that ends of justice would be met, if the authorities conducting the selection procedure embark upon a process of rationalization of the marks and in the event, it is noticed that there is a noticeable variation in the marks of the candidates, who appeared in the qualifying examinations at an earlier period of time in comparison with those who appeared at a later period of time, we leave it to the authorities to devise their own method as to how to rationalize their marks and thereafter take into consideration the rationalized marks of the candidates rather than the numerical marks of the respective candidates as depicted in the respective mark sheets. In our view, the process of rationalization would avoid a situation of any violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.” 6. From the aforesaid what is seen is that the observation made in paragraph 33 was made without entering the merit of the controversy and no determination was made that distribution of marks as questioned is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 7. That being the position, such observation cannot be treated as any direction or writ, rather this was a passing comment. 8. In view of the aforesaid, in the opinion of this court, no Page No.# 6/6 contempt petition shall be maintainable, for compliance of the paragraph 33 as quoted hereinabove not being any direction but observation without deciding on merit. 9. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant