WP(C) 906/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA . Heard Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Dr. Y .K. Phukan, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms M. Bhuyan, learned counsel repres enting the Respondents No.3 and 4. Also heard Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education. The petitioner, who is a Lecturer in Commerce (Accountancy) in Doomdooma College, has filed this writ petition making a grievance against the advertis ement dated 29.1.2010 (Annexure-11) by which the college authority has notified a vacancy of Lecturer in Commerce (Accountancy). According to the petitioner, sh e having already been appointed following regular recruitment process, against a non-sanctioned post, her case is required to be considered in terms of the gui delines issued vide Annexure-6 office memorandum dated 17.7.2004. But instead, the respondents have sought to fill up the vacant post of Lecturer in Commerce ( Accountancy) by way of open advertisement. The office memorandum, inter alia, pr ovides as follows :- 4.(b) In case of any future vacancies of sanctioned posts in a particular deptt . College teachers working without valid sanctioned post but appointed as per pr ocedure stated at (a) above are to be adjusted in preference to fresh teachers. It is on record that a seniority list of the Lecturers working against n on-sanctioned post has already been prepared by the authority and in the said li st, the name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No.232. It is also on record that the college aut hority earlier had sent a letter to the Director of Higher Education, Assam (Ann exure-9 dated 19.6.2009) on the subject of seniority of Lecturers working as aga inst non-sanctioned post. By the said letter, duly filled in prescribed proforma along with all the required documents was furnished in respect of the two Lectu rers of the college, out of which the name of the petitioner appeared at Sl. No. 1. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, the only stand taken is that since the petitioner does not conform to the requirement of the U.G.C. norms and has also not cleared NET and/or SLET, her case cannot be considered in terms of the aforesaid clause of the office memorandum. In terms of the aforesaid office memorandum, the college Lecturers are r equired to be adjusted against vacant post in the same department. The condition precedent for such adjustment is that the incumbent was appointed against a no n-sanctioned post pursuant to the regular process of selection. In the instant case, it has been admitted by the Director of Higher Education, Assam that the p etitioner was appointed pursuant to regular process of selection. The petitioner also fulfilled the required norms fixed by the UGC at the time of selection aga inst non-sanctioned post. Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner sub mits that even otherwise also, the petitioner fulfils the UGC norms. As regards the plea of the respondents in their affidavit that the petit ioner has not cleared the NET and/or SLET, the said position has been duly taken note of in the office memorandum itself. Clause 4(d) of the office memorandum provides as follo ws :- (d) The teachers working under non sanctioned post who will be adjusted against vacant sanctioned posts will be required to qualify in NET/SLET within 2 (two) years if they do not possess the same already otherwise their services would be discontinued and till then they will be entitled to basic pay only from the date of approval by Director of Higher Education, Assam. In view of the above, the case of the petitioner is required to be considered un der clause 4 (b) of the aforesaid memorandum and the vacant post cannot be fille d up through advertisement so as to deprive the petitioner. Accordingly, the im pugned advertisement dated 29.1.2010 stands set aside and quashed with the direc tion to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the c lause 4(b) of the aforesaid office memorandum so far as it relates to the post o f Lecturer in Commerce (Accountancy). So far as the requirement of clearing NET/ SLET is concerned, the respondents shall take note of clause 4(d) of the aforesa id office memorandum. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs.