Gauhati High Court
Smti Asha Rani Brahma vs Smti Binika Goyari And 9 Ors on 3 January, 2019
Author: A.S. Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna, Arup Kumar Goswami
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010273502018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA 367/2018
1:SMTI ASHA RANI BRAHMA
W/O SRI MRIDURAJ BASUMATARY, R/O VILL. NORTH SUKANIPAA, P.O.
KHAGRABARI, PIN 783380, DIST. CHIRANG, BTAD, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:SMTI BINIKA GOYARI AND 9 ORS
D/O SRI KATIMAL GOYARY, R/O VILL. BORIPARA, P.O. BOROBAZAR, P.S.
BIJNI, PIN 783393, DIST. CHIRANG, BTAD, ASSAM.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 06
3:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI 19
4:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECY.
BODAFA NWGWR
P.O. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR BTAD
ASSAM
PIN 783370
5:THE DEPUTY SECY. EDUCATION
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
EDUCATION P.O. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR BTAD
ASSAM
PIN 783370
Page No.# 2/4
6:THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
P.O. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR BTAD
ASSAM
PIN 783370
7:THE UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION
BAHASUR SHAH JAFAR MARG
NEW DELHI 02
8:THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR SELECTION OF ASSTT. PROFESSOR
BODO
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
BIJNI COLLEGE
P.O.AND P.S. BIJNI
DIST. CHIRANG
BTAD
ASSAM.
9:THE GOVERNING BODY
BIJNI COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
BIJNI COLLEGE
P.O. AND P.S. BIJNI
DIST.CHIRANG
BTAD
ASSAM.
10:THE PRINCIPAL
BIJINI COLLEGE
P.O.AND P.S.BIJNI
DIST. CHIRANG
BTAD
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HIGHER EDU
Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI 03.01.2019 (A.S. Bopanna, CJ) Heard Mr. P Upadhyay, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. UK Nair, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R Dhar, learned counsel for the caveator/ respondent No.1; Mr. K Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Higher) Department, Government of Assam for respondent Nos. 2 and 3; Ms. B Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, BTC for respondent Nos. 4,5 and 6 and Mr. A Chamuah, learned Standing Counsel, UGC for respondent No.7.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned counsel for the respondents, we are of the opinion that the matter requires consideration keeping in view that the learned Single Judge has referred to various regulations while arriving at the conclusion.
Admit.
In so far as the interim prayer made in the appeal to stay the order passed by the learned Single Judge is concerned, the learned senior counsel representing the caveator would oppose the same.
In the background of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the appellant and the contention raised by the learned senior counsel for the caveator, we notice that the consideration that would be required herein is with regard to the grant of benefit or otherwise for the teaching experience as claimed by the appellant. In that regard, Regulation 3.9.0 of the UGC Regulations, 2010, in the background of award of Junior Research Fellowship and the conditions imposed therein, will have to be taken note and in that light the consideration is required to be made.
If that be the position, if in the meanwhile the order of the learned Single Judge is Page No.# 4/4 implemented, the consideration would be futile and the appeal would render itself infructuous. Hence, we are of the opinion that the interim prayer as prayed for ought to be granted. Accordingly, the status quo existing as on today shall continue to remain in force till a consideration is made in this appeal.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant