MC 2422/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K.SHARMA. MC 2422/2010inWP(C) 3981/2010 Heard Mr. D. Das, learned counsel appearing for the authorities of the B .T.C/applicants. Also heard Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned Sr. counsel for the writ p etitioner. By means of this application, the applicants have prayed for vacation of the interim order dated 21.7.2010 passed in the writ petition, by which the ora l test/interview for the post of Supervisor, which was scheduled to be held on 2 3.7.2010 for the district of Chirang, has been stayed with further direction not to hold the same without the leave of this Court. The aforesaid interim order has been passed primarily on the basis of tw o aspects of the matter, which are - (1) in the advertisement, no qualifying mar k for written examination was prescribed and (2) a particular candidate, who did not appear in the written examination, has been shown selected for the oral tes t/interview. In the application filed by the applicants, it has been stated that the selectio n committee constituted for the purpose, in its meeting held on 26.2.2010 decide d to hold the written test consisting of 70 marks and viva voce test consisting of 30 marks, prescribing the minimum qualifying marks in the written test as 45. It has been stated in the application that the candidates, who qualified in the written examination by securing the said cut-off marks or more than that only, have been called for the oral test/interview. As regards the contentions raised in the writ petition that a candidate, who did not appear in the written test, h as been called for interview, same has been categorically denied by furnishing t he particulars of the said candidate and stating that the said candidate has bee n called for viva voce test having qualified in the written test. In the advertisement itself, it was provided that in case of large numbe r of candidates, there could be amongst others, screening test for selecting the candidates for interview/oral test. That apart, the selection committee in its meeting held on 26.2.2010 also adopted its own device and methodology of the se lection which prima facie cannot be faulted with. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the proposed interview/viva voce test should be allowed to be held inasmuch as the candidates who have come out successful in the written test, are awaiting for the oral tes t/interview and it will not be conducive in the interest of justice to stall the entire proceeding on the basis of the allegation made by a single candidate. In view of the above, the interim order passed on 21.7.2010 shall stand vacated. It will be open for the applicants to conduct the oral test/interview, which, however, will be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition. Furt her, the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of deciding th e instant application and shall have no bearing on the merit of the writ petitio n, which will be decided on its own merit, independent of this order. It is furt her provided that if possible, the authority may keep one post vacant till fina l adjudication of the matter. Misc. Case stands disposed of.