Amitava Roy, J. - (1.) THE petitioner seeks the intervention of this Court to quash the resolutions dated 20.12.2005 and 30.7.2006 adopted by the Governing Body of the Hojai College, Hojai, Nagaon (hereafter referred to as the College) for regularizing the services of the respondents 5, 6 and 7 against sanctioned posts lying vacant in the department of Economics, English and Mathematics respectively as well as the Government approval therefore as conveyed by its letter No. AHE.238/2006/207 dated 5.5.2007. A writ of mandamus and/or direction has been sought for instead to regularize her services against any of the posts in the aforementioned departments. This Court while issuing notice of notion on 4.5.2007 had maintained status quo with regard to the process of recommendation and approval of the regularization of the above mentioned respondents in terms of the resolutions impugned. I have heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department for the State respondents, Mr. G. Uzir, learned Counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 (the College and the Governing Body), Mr. S.N. Sharma, Sr. Advocate for the respondents 5 and 6 and Mr. N. Choudhury, Advocate for the respondent No. 7.
(2.) THE fascicule of facts as the preface for the combative arguments generated thereby has been provided by the parties in their pleadings. The petitioner has introduced herself to be a Post Graduate in Chemistry (Inorganic) having secured First Class from Gauhati University. She claims to have U.G.C. Norms. She responded to an advertisement published by the College in the local daily, the Assam Tribune for appointment amongst others as a Lecturer in Chemistry with specialization Inorganic (Quantum). After subjecting herself to the selection process that followed by order dated 1.9.2000 she was appointed as a Lecturer in Chemistry on ad hoc basis on a consolidated pay of Rs. 1250/ - P.M. initially for a period of three months. She accordingly joined on 2.9.2000. The petitioner has disclosed that through the same process as many as six lecturers including her were appointed in various departments, their names and other relevant particulars being as follows.
(3.) ALL these appointments were against non -sanctioned posts necessitated by the extent of enrolment in the respective departments. The petitioner has claimed that though her initial term of appointment had been for three months, she was allowed to continue thereafter and accordingly she is rendering her services as such since then till date. Referring to an office memorandum dated 17.7.2004 issued by the Government of Assam in the Education Department, the petitioner has pleaded that it having provided for withdrawal of sanctioned posts lying vacant in other departments to accommodate teachers of Deficit Grants -in -aid Colleges of the State serving against non -sanctioned posts in order of seniority, the Director of Higher Education, Assam by his letter dated 20.7.2004 requested all such institutions to take necessary follow up steps in accordance therewith. The petitioner has contended that amongst the six lecturers appointed as above, she is senior to the respondents 5, 6 and Ms. Sharmistha Paul and in terms of the aforementioned office memorandum she is thus entitled to a preference in the matter of adjustment/accommodation as contemplated therein. According to her, the Governing Body of the College on 20.12.2005 adopted a resolution whereby though vacant sanctioned posts in the department of Economics and English were identified to be diverted to regularize respondents 5 and 6 who are junior to her, no such post was ascertained for her. While asserting that at all relevant times there was no vacant sanctioned post in the Department of Assamese in the College, the petitioner being aggrieved, submitted a representation on 16.7.2006 before the Departmental Minister for redressal of her grievance. Subsequent thereto on 30.7.2002, the Governing Body of the College took a resolution whereby respondents 5 and 6 were recommended for regularization against vacancies in the departments of Economics and English and a post from the Department of Assamese was resolved to be withdrawn to accommodate the petitioner. Realizing that the diversion of the post from the Assamese department would not be feasible and that the resolution dated 30.7.2006 vis -a -vis her was only a formality with no realistic prospect, the petitioner submitted representations before the various authorities of the department but to no avail. She being apprised of the fact that steps were afoot to accord approval to the resolution dated 30.7.2006 for accommodating respondents 5 and 6 which according to her is in contravention of the letter and spirit of the office memorandum dated 17.7.2004, she has sought to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court for succour.;