Gauhati High Court Flays 2 Assessments in One Interview

Directs AIIMS Guwahati to appoint petitioner as assistant professor

STAFF REPORTER

GUWAHATI: The Gauhati High Court ticked off the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Guwahati for two assessments of one interview, which led to one person being deprived of a job as an assistant professor.

The HC interfered in the appointment process of two assistant professors in AIIMS Guwahati and directed that the petitioner be appointed as assistant professor, in place of another or without disturbing the earlier appointment, if possible.

Petitioner Vikramjeet Dutta filed a case in the HC challenging the appointment of respondents Kausalya Raghuraman and Rajeswarie S, submitting that he had secured more marks than the respondents in the assessment for associate professor while getting lower marks in the assessment for the post of assistant professor, although one interview was held and one set of questions used in the interview.

The selection and appointment of respondent nos. 5 (Kausalya Raghuraman) and 6 (Rajeswarie S) as Assistant Professor in the Department of Microbiology in the All India Institute of Medical Science, Guwahati (hereafter AIIMS, Guwahati) is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition (Case No. WP(C)/420/2023). In the case of the petitioner (Vikramjeet Dutta), in a common interview held for the post of Associate Professor as well as Assistant Professor, two assessments were made. While in the assessment for the post of Associate Professor, the petitioner had secured higher marks than that of the respondent nos. 5 and 6, on the other hand, a different assessment was made based on the same interview for the post of Assistant Professor, in which the respondent nos. 5 and 6 were given more marks than that of the petitioner and were ultimately given the appointments.

The interview was held following an advertisement published on October 5, 2021, for filling up of various posts in the AIIMS, Guwahati, amongst others, the posts of Associate Professor and Assistant Professor in the Department of Microbiology.

The single-judge bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi heard U. K. Nair, senior counsel for the petitioner, as well as B. Gogoi, the counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 6. The materials placed before the court were also carefully perused.

After hearing the counsel for the parties and on examination of the materials on record placed before this court, certain undisputed aspects were noted: (i) The interview for the post of Associate Professor as well as Assistant Professor in the Department of Microbiology, AIIMS, was fixed for April 23, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. (ii) For both the posts of Associate Professor as well as Assistant Professor, only one interview was held; iii) For the common interview held for both the posts, there was one set of questions; iv) While for the post of Associate Professor, the petitioner was allotted 67.3%, the respondent nos. 5 and 6 were allotted 66.8% and 62%, respectively; vi) For the assessment made for the post of Assistant Professor, while the petitioner was allotted marks of 63.1%, the respondent nos. 5 and 6 were allotted marks of 68.2% and 67%; vii) On the basis of the assessment made, on June 10, 2022, the respondent nos. 5 and 6 were appointed as Assistant Professor in the AIIMS, Guwahati.

After examining the facts and circumstances of the case and also the admitted position, the Court was of the opinion that offering appointment to the respondent nos. 5 and 6 to the post of Assistant Professor by allotting them more marks in a selection process consisting of one interview, including the post of Associate Professor, which is admittedly a higher post, and in which the petitioner was allotted more marks, appointment to the said respondent nos. 5 and 6 by depriving the petitioner cannot be held to be justified.

The court concluded that since the petitioner was assessed to be better than the aforesaid two respondents in the higher category of Associate Professor, the petitioner has to be given the benefit of appointment as Assistant Professor after being assessed as better than the said respondents 5 and 6. Consequently, respondent no. 6 has to give way to the petitioner to be appointed as an assistant professor at AIIMS, Guwahati. The court accordingly interfered with the appointment of respondent no. 6 and directed that the petitioner be offered the appointment of Assistant Professor in AIIMS, Guwahati. However, despite the aforesaid direction, the AIIMS, Guwahati, was still given liberty to make an arrangement to the effect that, without disturbing the appointments of the private respondents, if the petitioner can be appointed as an assistant professor, that option can be explored.

The court further directed that the appointment of the petitioner as assistant professor has to take effect from the same date as the appointment of private respondents nos. 5 and 6 by giving him notional benefits. It was further made clear that in such a case, wherein the petitioner can be accommodated without disturbing the private respondents, the same would not be a precedent for any other appointments.

Also Read:  AIIMS Guwahati: Revolutionising healthcare in the Northeast

Also Watch: