WA 358/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. SAIKIA Sharma, J Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. S.M.T. Chisti, learned Standin g Counsel, Education. This appeal is directed against the order dated 2.11.2011, by which the writ petition filed by the respondent No.6 challenging the contractual appointme nt of the appellant was allowed. The appellant was appointed on contractual basi s for a period of 11 months, which came to an end in May, 2010. Such appointment was made on the basis of the selection conducted by the Managing Committee of t he School of which the father of the appellant was the Member-Secretary. In the capacity of Member-Secretary, he participated in the selection in which his son appeared and even awarded marks to him. It is in the aforesaid backdrop, the learned Single Judge has interfered with the selection of the appellant including the subsequent extension granted towards continuation of the contractual appointment. Mr. Sarmah, learned counsel for the appellant submits that even if the m arks awarded by his father as a Member of the Selection Board, is excluded, than also having regard to the marks awarded by the other Members of the selection c ommittee and also having regard to his higher educational qualification, the app ellant would have scored marks over the other candidates. The learned Single Judge dealing with the aforesaid contention, has obse rved that the selection process has to be fair and transparent and in that view of the matter when the father of the appellant had participated in the selection , there can be no guarantee of the fairness of the selection process. Above apart, even the term of extension, which was 11 months from June,2 010, has also expired. Thus, no further extension of service can be granted to t he appellant. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed b y the learned Single Judge and consequently the writ appeal is dismissed. The re spondents are directed to hold a fresh selection as has already been directed by the learned Single Judge. Writ appeal is dismissed, without however, any order as to costs.