Gauhati High Court
The Director Of Education vs Husna Ara Begam on 17 September, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010182152025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/268/2025
THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL, KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM.
VERSUS
HUSNA ARA BEGAM
W/O SHEIKH ABDULLAH, R/O GHORAMARA, P.O. RAINADUBRI,
DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM.
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. S. Bora, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : ............................
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
17.09.2025
(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)
We have heard Mr. S. Bora, learned Advocate for the appellant.
The sole respondent was appointed on 23.10.2013 as an Assistant
Professor on the 4th post in the Department of English in Fakiragram College,
Kokrajhar.
After her appointment, there were 13 more appointments, which included
one person belonging to ST(P) category in the faculty of English.
Since the person appointed under ST(P) category did not join the College,
that position remained vacant. In fact, he had left the service of the College
Page No.# 2/3
before the College was provincialized.
In order to fill up that post of Assistant Professor in English Department,
the advertisement in question was issued, inviting applications from ST(P)
candidates.
The respondent contended that as on date 3(three) persons, belonging to
ST(P) candidates, were already serving in the Department and therefore, the
advertisement could not have been issued, limiting it only for candidates under
the ST(P) category; for, it would lead to an excess of reserved quota as per
roster point laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 04.11.2013.
The major plank of argument of the respondent was that the post was
being reserved for ST(P) only on the ground that the said post was
provincialised in favour of ST(P) reserved candidate who had quit the College.
The learned Single Judge, after going through the roster, found that there
were 15 posts of teaching staff of Fakiragram College, out of which 3(three)
posts were already occupied by ST(P) candidates. When the person, who quit
the College was appointed, the College had not been provincialized and,
therefore, no post could be reserved for a category beyond the quota under the
roster.
The learned Single Judge referred to the process of initial preparation of
the Roster Register and found that later for filling up any post beyond the quota
would not be permissible and in that case, squeezing of the roster was required.
The object of reservation is to provide adequate representation to the
Scheduled Castes (SC)/Scheduled Tribes (ST) and Backward Classes in services
and as such, any mechanism provided to achieve that aim must have nexus to
the objects sought to be achieved.
It was argued that for working out the percentage of reservation, the
Page No.# 3/3
promotees/appointees belonging to the Schedule Castes and Backward classes,
whether appointed against the General category posts or against the reserved
posts are to be counted and if the number for a particular quota is filled, the
roster thereafter as running account, continues.
The learned Single Judge, on perusal of Roster Register of the College,
found that out of 15 posts in the Department of English, 3(three) posts were
already occupied by ST(P) candidates and if the post at Serial No.15 of the
Roster Register would be reserved, , it would exceed the percentage of
reservation and will be contrary to the reservation policy.
For this reason, the advertisement in question was quashed and the
Principal of the Fakiragram College was directed to re-advertise the post for
Unreserved category.
The learned counsel for the appellant/State has questioned the afore-
noted judgment on the ground that by virtue of Notification dated 01.10.2022,
the teaching post for Bodo Department has been exempted from reservation.
The appellant contends that this Notification was not taken into account while
the impugned judgment was passed.
Let notice be issued to the sole respondent by both modes, i.e. by
registered post with A/D as well as by usual process, on steps being taken by
the appellant/State within a period of 2(two) weeks from today, returnable on
10.11.2025.
Re-notify on 10.11.2025.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
