WP(C) 3306/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr BB Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms Bar uah, learned Standing counsel, Education Department and Mr BD Konwar, learned co unsel for the Respondent Nos 3 and 4. The petitioner’s case in brief is that, he had donated 25 bighas of lan d to Kalabari Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as the ’college’) in the ye ar 1993 on the assurance of the Governing Body thereof that in return, two memb ers of his family would be provided with employment in Grade III and Grade IV po sts respectively. According to the petitioner, a resolution was also taken by th e Governing Body to the said effect in its meeting held in the year 1993. Howeve r, the assurance , notwithstanding, the Governing Body did not take any step fo r appointment of the petitioner’s son and daughter-in-law as requested by him. As his un-tiring efforts in this regard failed to evoke any result, he has app roached this Court for redress. The College authorities( Respondent Nos 3 and 4) have in their affidavi t denied the fact of donation of any land by the petitioner. They have also disp uted that no assurance by the Governing Body had been accorded to the petitione r as claimed by him. According to them, the then President of the Governing Bod y of the College in his individual capacity submitted a proposal before the M inister , Panchayat & Rural Development and Elementary Education, Assam espousin g the cause of the petitioner affirming that he had donated 25 bighas of land o n the condition that two members of his family would be provided with the employ ment in Grade III and Grade IV posts. In the affidavit, the answering responden ts have also contended that there is no contemporaneous records on the issue. Mr Gogoi has urged that in the face of the letter dated 7.10.2005 of the President of the Governing Body of the College addressed to the Minister, Panc hayat & Rural Development and Elementary Education, Assam endorsing the petition er’s stand for appropriate steps facilitating appointment of two members of fa mily against Grade III and Grade IV posts in the college, the present stand of t he Governing Body is per se untenable besides being unfair and unreasonable. Mr Konwar while endorsing the pleaded stand of the Governing Body has su bmitted that its contention before this Court notwithstanding, if the family members of the petitioner offer their candidature for appointment against any po st commensurate with their academic qualification, the same would be considered along with other eligible candidates as and when vacancies therein occur and th e College authorities decide to fill up the same. Mr Gogoi , learned counsel for the petitioner feels assured with the abo ve submission. Having regard to the fact that the College is neither a provincialised n or a government institution and that the appointments to its posts are administe red and controlled by its authorities, this petition stands disposed with the ob servation that as and when vacancies in the said institution occur, if the peti tioner or his family members apply therefor, their cases , subject to the condit ions of eligibility prescribed, would also be considered along with other eligib le candidates for appointment keeping the above background in mind. No costs.