Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs Salma Sultana on 12 January, 2024
Author: M.R. Pathak
Bench: Manash Ranjan Pathak
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010006682024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/164/2024
THE NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI AND ANR
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, B-15, INSTITUTIONAL
AREA, SECTOR-62, NOIDA, DIST- GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR, UTTAR
PRADESH-201309
2: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI
SHILLONG REGION
TEMPLE ROAD
BARIK POINT
LACHUMIERE
SHILLONG-79300
VERSUS
SALMA SULTANA
D/O LT. SHAMSUL HAQUE, R/O VILL-TUKRAPARA, P.O.-TUKRAPARA, DIST-
KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781136
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. R S CHOWDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent :
Page No.# 2/5
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
12/01/2024
(M.R. Pathak, J)
Heard Ms. R S Chowdhury, learned Standing counsel appearing for the petitioners, Navodaya
Vidyalaya Samity.
2. Dissatisfied with the order dated 30.05.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative
Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench, Guwahati admitting the Original Application No. 105/2023 preferred
by the sole respondent, the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.
3. It is seen that Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity, Department of School Education and Literacy,
Government of India made a Special Recruitment Drive 2022-23 for Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas
(JNVs) of North Eastern Region in the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya,
Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura occurring up to the year 2023 for the posts of Principal, Post
Graduate Teachers, Trained Graduate Teachers and Miscellaneous Category of Teachers in Navodaya
Vidyalaya Samity for the JNV's located under Shillong Region in North Eastern Region under the
Special Recruitment Drive amongst various others by publishing the advertisement in its website as
well as in the Employment News dated 09 th - 15th July, 2022.
4. Clause 6 of the said advertisement of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity relates to General
Instructions to the Candidates.
5. Sub-Clause 23 of said Clause 6 of the advertisement, noted above, in bold letters, specifically
provided that - "any dispute with regard to this recruitment shall be subject to the Court having its
jurisdiction in Delhi only".
6. Though, the sole respondent/the applicant was issued with a call letter for her appearance in
the interview on 21.03.2023 to the post of Post Graduate Teacher in Chemistry as applied by her
pursuant to the said advertisement, but on verification of her testimonials, she was found ineligible for
the interview to the said post.
7. Being aggrieved with such rejection, the sole respondent preferred the Original Application
No. 105/2023 before the CAT at Guwahati, which was objected by the present petitioners stating that
Page No.# 3/5
the advertisement itself specified that jurisdiction to any such dispute relating to selection and
appointment pursuant to the said advertisement relates to the Court having its jurisdiction in Delhi
only.
8. Ms. Chowdhury, learned Standing counsel, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity appearing for the
petitioners submitted that in spite of placing the relevant judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as
well as that of the Gujarat High Court, the learned CAT, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati proceeded with
the matter and thereby acted jurisdiction and in excess of it and illegally passed the impugned order
dated 30.05.2023 in O.A. No. 105/2023, thus assuming the jurisdiction of the case on itself.
9. Ms. Chowdhury, learned Standing counsel, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity appearing for the
petitioners from the Original Application of the petitioners annexed to this writ petition placed before
the Court that the applicant/the sole respondent herein suppressed the Clause 6 (23) of the said
advertisement issued by the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity and willfully did not annex the Page No. 21 of
the said advertisement issued by the NVS before the Tribunal the page in which Clause 6 (23)
exclusion of other Courts except at Delhi was mentioned.
10. Ms. Chowdhury for the petitioners submitted that as per the advertisement of the NVS,
involved in this petition, since the jurisdiction of the matter vests only with the Central Administrative
Tribunal, Delhi Bench at Delhi and/or the Delhi High Court, at best the CAT, Guwahati should have
referred the application filed by the sole respondent to its counterpart at CAT, Delhi since the
Guwahati Bench of the CAT does not have the jurisdiction in terms of specific provisions of Clause 6
(23) of the advertisement. Hence, this writ petition.
11. Ms. Chowdhury, also submitted that as per the order of the CAT, Guwahati one post of Post
Graduate Teacher (Chemistry) as advertised in the Employment News dated 09 th - 15th July, 2022 has
been kept vacant.
12. Perused the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of A.B.C. Laminart Pvt. Ltd. and
Another Vs. A.P. Agencies, Salem , reported in (1989) 2 SCC 163 as well as Rajasthan State Electricity
Board Vs. Universal Petrol Chemical s Limited, reported in (2009) 3 SCC 107, wherein the Hon'ble Apex
Court have held that in respect of territorial jurisdiction, legal proposition is settled when there is
unambiguous and explicit clause in the contract, the said position is binding on both the parties who
contest the proceeding.
Page No.# 4/5
13. In those two judgments, the Hon'ble Apex Court also observed that when both the parties
with their open eyes entered into a purchase order and agree thereon wherein it is categorically
provided that all disputes arising between the parties out of the agreements would be adjudicated
upon and decided through a process of law and that no Court other than the Court as specified shall
have the jurisdiction to entertain or try the same.
14. The Hon'ble Apex Court in those judgments relating to ouster of territorial jurisdiction of
other Courts also specifying that when the Clause is clear, unambiguous and specific, then accepted
notions of contract would bind on the parties and unless the absence of ad idem can be shown, the
other Courts should avoid exercising jurisdiction. The Hon'ble Apex Court observed that when words
like 'alone', 'only', 'exclusive', and the like have been used, as regards construction of the ouster clause
there may be no difficulty and even without such words in appropriate cases, the maxim "expressio
unius est exclusio alterius - expression of one is the exclusion of another have to be applied. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court further observed that ― what is an appropriate case shall depend on the facts
of the case. In such a case, mention of one thing may imply exclusion of another. When certain
jurisdiction is specified in a contract an intention to exclude all others from the operation may in such
cases be inferred. It has therefore to be properly construed.
15. In the case in hand, at Clause 6 (23) of the said advertisement issued by the petitioners in
the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity, it is specifically provided that any dispute with regard to the
recruitment involved therein shall be subject to the Court having its jurisdiction in Delhi only and
pursuant to the said advertisement, the sole respondent/applicant participated in the selection process
where her candidature was rejected in spite of issuance of call letter while verifying her testimonials at
the time of interview as her candidature was not in accordance with the specific requisite criteria
made by the petitioners Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity.
16. Submission of Ms. Chowdhury, learned Standing counsel, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity,
appearing for the petitioners, has force.
17. Issue notice, returnable by 8 (eight) weeks.
18. Petitioners are directed to take step for service of notice on the sole respondent by registered
post with A/D on or before 19.01.2024, providing her proper and correct address with requisite postal
stamp.
19. In the interim, subject to taking steps on the sole respondent, as directed above, the
Page No.# 5/5
impugned order dated 30.05.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati
Bench, Guwahati in the Original Application No. 105/2023 preferred by the sole respondent as
applicant is hereby stayed and further, the proceeding of said Original Application No. 105/2023
pending before the CAT, Guwahati be kept in abeyance until further order of the Court.
20. List accordingly on a date to be fixed by the Registry along with WP(C) No. 163/2024.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
