Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors on 1 April, 2026
Author: Nelson Sailo
Bench: Nelson Sailo
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010063882026
2026:GAU-AS:4641
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1880/2026
DR ANURUDHAY BAYAN
S/O- PREM NATH BAYAN, R/O- BARPETA TOWN, GALIYA HATI, G.C. LANE
WARD NO.9,, DISTRICT- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06
2:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-19
3:GOVERNING BODY OF MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
SUBHA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 781305
4:PRINCIPAL
MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
SUBHA
P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 781305
5:PROMOTIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE
HELD ON 10/03/2026 FOR PROMOTION OF THE ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
(SELECTION GRADE/ACADEMIC LEVEL 12) TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
(ACADEMIC LEVEL 13A) REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN
MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
Page No.# 2/4
SUBHA
P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 781305
6:RITAMONI BAISHYA
SUBJECT-EXPERT
PROMOTIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE HELD ON 10/03/2026 FOR
PROMOTION OF THE ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (SELECTION
GRADE/ACADEMIC LEVEL 12) TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR (ACADEMIC
LEVEL 13A) REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN
MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
SUBHA
P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 781305
7:KUSHUM KUNJA MALAKAR
SUBJECT-EXPERT
PROMOTIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE HELD ON 10/03/2026 FOR
PROMOTION OF THE ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (SELECTION
GRADE/ACADEMIC LEVEL 12) TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR (ACADEMIC
LEVEL 13A) REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN
MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
SUBHA
P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 781305
8:HARENDRA NATH TALUKDAR
PRESIDENT OF THE GOVERNING BODY AS WELL AS CHAIRMAN OF THE
PROMOTIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE HELD ON 10/03/2026
MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
SUBHA
P.O.- CHENGA
DISTRICT- BARPETA
PIN- 78130
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P MAHANTA, C SARMA,MS. P SAHARIA
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HIGHER EDU,
Page No.# 3/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
Date : 01-04-2026 Heard Mr. P Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D Upamanyu, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.
[2.] By filing this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved with the decision of the Promotional Screening Committee which was held on 10.03.2026 for considering promotion of the petitioner under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS). The petitioner is an Associate Professor (Selection Grade) at Level 11-12 and aspires to be promoted to the post of Associate Professor at Level 13-A. [3.] The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criteria for promotion through CAS has been provided by the Government of Assam in the Higher Education Department through Office Memorandum dated 13.06.2025, wherein the minimum API score required for promotion is 45 per assessment period. The petitioner contends that he has come to learn from a reliable source that he has only been given 40 API score and therefore, he will not be eligible to be promoted as Associate Professor at Level 13-A. [4.] Mr. P Mahanta, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the service particulars of the petitioner which is uploaded in the Assam State Higher Education Portal wherein in respect of the publication and other research papers, the petitioner has been shown to have published 8 (eight) books and for which he is shown to have scored 8 (eight) marks each totaling to 64 (sixty four). While such is the position, the petitioner contends that the score given to him in the API is only 40 (forty).
Page No.# 4/4 [5.] Upon being asked, as to whether the final score and the results of the selection has been published and intimated to the petitioner, Mr. P Mahanta, learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been informed that the proceedings of the selection will be placed before the Governing Body and it is only then that the final result will be intimated to the petitioner. Also any application seeking the API score of the petitioner will be available only after the Governing Body meets.
[6.] Considering the above position, this Court finds the writ petition to be pre- mature and therefore, is not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. Although Mr. P Mahanta, learned counsel prays for a direction to the Governing Body to have an early sitting, this Court would not like to give such a direction in the absence of any accrued right or any specific provision by which a timeframe has been fixed for holding Governing Body.
[7.] Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant