[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Sameer Ranjan Das vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And 3 Ors on 6 March, 2026
Author: M. Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010032462026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/56/2026
SAMEER RANJAN DAS
S/O MUKHESWAR DAS, R/O BORBIL NO. 2, P.O. AND P.S. DIGBOI, DIST.
TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN 786171
VERSUS
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND 3 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, GUWAHATI
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, EAST POINT TOWER, BAMUNIMAIDAN,
GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN 781021
2:THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
HUMAN RESOURCE
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
GUWAHATI REFINERY
NOONMATI
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781020
3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER/DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
KAMRUP (R)
ASSAM
4:KANKAN JYOTI MALAKAR
S/O DHARMESWAR MALAKAR
R/O HAJO BARCHAPORI
P.O. AND P.S.- HAJO
DIST- KAMRUP (R)
ASSAM
PIN-78110
Page No.# 2/5
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR BHASKAR BARUAH, I L NGAMLAI
Advocate for the Respondent : MS. R B BORA, JR. GOVT. ADV. R-3, MR. S BANIKYA(R1,2),MR.
M GOGOI(R1,2),MR. N DEKA(R1,2),MR. N DEKA R-1
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
Date : 06.03.2026
(M. Zothankhuma, J)
Heard Mr. B. Baruah, learned counsel for the appellant.
2. The appellant's case is that the respondent no.4 had filed WP(C) 62/2025,
as his candidature for the post of Junior Engineering Assistant-IV (Production)
pursuant to the Advertisement dated 20.07.2024, was rejected by the Indian Oil
Corporation Limited (IOCL), on the ground that the respondent no.4's caste
could not be determined on the basis of the Caste Certificate submitted by the
respondent no.4. The IOCL had thus found the Caste Certificate submitted by
the respondent no.4 to be defective.
3. The learned Single Judge, vide the impugned order dated 10.12.2025, did
not find any error in the rejection of the respondent no.4's candidature on the
ground that the caste of the respondent no.4 could not be determined on the
basis of the Caste Certificate submitted by the respondent no.4, which was in
the prescribed format. The learned Single Judge however held that there was
no dispute with regard to the Caste Certificate submitted by the respondent
no.4, which had been issued by the office of the District Commissioner, Kamrup,
just because the respondent no.4 had not disclosed the particular caste/sub-
Page No.# 3/5
caste to which he belonged to. As such, the same could not be a ground to
reject the Caste Certificate of the respondent no.4 (writ petitioner). The learned
Single Judge then directed the State respondents to consider the case of the
respondent no.4 with regard to whether he belonged to the 'Mali Community',
as a Scheduled Caste Community in the State of Assam, in terms of the
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.
4. The IOCL in compliance with the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed
in WP(C) 62/2025 thereafter found the respondent No.4 to be belonging to the
"Mali" schedule caste and subsequently appointed the respondent no.4 (writ
petitioner) to the post of Junior Engineering Assistant-IV (Production), in
pursuance to the Advertisement dated 20.07.2024, as the respondent no.4 had
secured more marks than the present appellant, who was not made a party in
the writ petition.
5. The appellant filed application, i.e. I.A(C) No.549/2026 for leave to prefer
an appeal against the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed in WP(C)
62/2025, inasmuch as, the appellant was not made a party in WP(C) 62/2025.
As the writ petition was allowed and the post that was to be filled up by the
appellant had now been filled up by the respondent no.4, appellant had been
condemned without being heard. I.A(C) No.549/2026 was allowed vide order
dated 23.02.2026.
6. The Caste Certificate to be submitted by the candidates in the prescribed
format as per the advertisement clearly shows that the caste of the candidate
Page No.# 4/5
has to be stated in the said prescribed format. The extract of the Caste
Certificate submitted by the respondent no.4 is reproduced hereinbelow, as
follows :
"This is to certify that Sri/Smt./Kum. KANGKAN JYOTI MALAKAR
son/daughter of DHARMESWAR MALAKAR of village/town BARCHAPARI in
District-KAMRUP of the State ASSAM belongs to the SCHEDULE Caste
which is recognized as Scheduled Caste under :
1. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950"
7. The extract of the Caste Certificate submitted by the appellant is
reproduced hereinbelow, as follows :
"This is to certify that Sri/Smt./Kum. SAMEER RANJAN DAS
son/daughter of MUKHESWAR DAS of village/town BALIJAN BORBIL in
District-TINSUKIA of the State ASSAM belongs to the KAIBARTIA (JALIYA)
Caste which is recognized as Scheduled Caste under :"
8. A perusal of the above Caste Certificate submitted by the respondent no.4
shows that the respondent has not mentioned any caste to which he belongs to
and has only inserted the word 'Schedule', as the name of the caste, to which
he belongs to. There is nothing to shows that the word 'Schedule' can be
construed to mean that the respondent no.4 belonged to any particular
caste/sub-caste in question.
9. Issue Notice returnable on 21.04.2026.
Page No.# 5/5
10. Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 & 2 submits that in
pursuance to the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed in WP(C) 62/2025,
the respondent no.4 (writ petitioner) has been held to be belonging to the
Scheduled Caste "Mali" and as he had secured marks higher than the appellant
in the selection process, the respondent no.4 has been appointed to the post of
Junior Engineering Assistant-IV (Production). However, if the caste certificate of
the respondent No.4 is found to be defective and cannot be acted upon, then
the appellant will have to be appointed in place of the respondent No.4.
11. Ms. R.B. Borah, learned counsel appears for the respondent no.3.
12. Appellant to take steps for service of notice upon the respondent no.4 by
speed post within 2 (two) days. In addition to the above, the appellant is also
permitted to take steps for service of notice upon the respondent no.4 by dasti
notice and file affidavit of service thereafter.
13. List the matter on 21.04.2026.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
