GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON MS GEETA KULI AND ORS V/S THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

GUWAHATI, India, Dec. 17 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Nov. 17:

1. We have heard Ms. G. Goswami, learned Advocate for the appellants in both the appeals and Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department for respondent Nos.1 to 3 in both the appeals.

2. Both the appeals being inter-connected, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. By the impugned common judgment dated 26.09.2025, the contentions raised on behalf of the appellants that their appointment, notwithstanding the fact that it was under Regulation 3(f) of the Assam Public Service Commission (Limitation of Functions) Regulations, 1951 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Regulations, 1951') was a permanent appointment and, therefore, they ought not to have been released from service when fresh recruitment process was initiated and completed, has been rejected.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were appointed as Lecturers in different subjects at the newly established five Polytechnics in the district of Tinsukia, Hailakandi, Chirang, Morigaon and Udalguri. The colleges had started functioning from the year 2020 and the appellants were appointed against an Advertisement issued on 25.02.2020 by the Director of Technical Education, Assam. Under the advertisement, applications were invited for filling up various posts, including that of Assistant Professor under Regulation 3(f) of the Regulations, 1951. The aforenoted Regulation allows for temporary appointments in urgent situation without full involvement of the Assam Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred as 'APSC') to avoid delays. The appellants claimed to have applied, passed the written test, whereafter their documents were verified and were appointed sometimes in February, 2021, initially for four months on ad-hoc basis. The services of the appellants were extended multiple times with the last extension being in September, 2023 when a fresh selection process was completed based on a cabinet decision dated September 12, 2023.

5. The claim of the appellants before the learned Single Judge was that even prior to the Advertisement of 2020, the Government of Assam in its Department of Higher Education (Technical) had created 260 posts for these five colleges after obtaining financial concurrence on February 3 and 4, 2020. The appellants, therefore, contend that notwithstanding the Advertisement issued in the year 2020, clarifying that it was under Regulation 3(f) of the Regulations, 1951, their appointments were against the sanctioned permanent posts. The posts could not be called temporary.

The other reason, which the appellants contended before the learned Single Judge for treating their services as regular and not ad hoc, was the grant of ex-post facto approval by the Government to their appointments from the date of their joining pursuant to a cabinet decision on November 24, 2021.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xyhhxnwN3wJPiDhISIpZJQUVbM4HyuW%2Fi70v%2Fmx3cYwl&caseno=WA/352/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010237812025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.