Heard Mr R Islam, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner. Mr H K Das, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the
respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and Mr S Das, the learned counsel appears on behalf
of the respondent No. 5. Mr K R Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate,
Page No.# 3/21
Assam appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 4.
2. The petitioner, herein, is aggrieved by the selection and appointment of
the respondent No. 5, to the post of Process Server, in spite of the fact that the
petitioner secured higher marks in the Economically Weaker Section (EWS)
category.
3. To appreciate the case set out by the petitioner, this Court finds it relevant
to take note of the brief facts, which led to the filing of the present writ petition.
The District and Sessions Judge, South Salmara, i.e. the respondent No. 3, had
issued an advertisement on 21.10.2022, for filling up of 3 (three) vacant posts.
One post was earmarked for General category, the second was reserved for
MOBC/OBC, and the third post was reserved for EWS. There is no mention in
the advertisement that any of these posts is reserved for women, though was
required under the Assam Women (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and
Posts) Act, 2005 (hereinafter, referred to as “the Act of 2005”), which was duly
applicable.