WP(C) 1991/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY None appears for the petitioner when the case is called. 2 Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education appears for respon dents 1 & 2. The Principal and the Governing Body of the Morigaon College (respo ndents 3 & 4) are represented by Ms. S. Bora, learned Counsel. 3. The petitioner who was appointed as a Lecturer of Geography at a fixed p ay of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) in a non sanctioned post in Morigaon Colleg e, seeks direction for sanctioning of a regular post of Lecturer in Geography, to accommodate her on regular basis. 4. In the absence of any representation from the side of the petitioner who had engaged 3 lawyers, the materials on record have been perused with the assis tance of the Standing Counsel and the Counsel appearing for the College authorit ies. 5. The principal in his affidavit has averred that the petitioner is not th e senior most Lecturer working in a non sanctioned post in the college and trans fer of the regular posts from other department to the department of Geography is not considered justified because of the lesser number of students for Geography , as compared to the number of students in Political Science department. 6. It is further averred that conversion of the lecturer’s post of History, to accommodate the petitioner in the Geography department would also be unfair as because, it will create difficulties in the History department. 7. The principal further states that the post in the English department, wi ll be filled up after due advertisement and this post can’t be transferred to th e Geography department. 8. Although Office Memorandum dated 17.7.2004 permits allocation of unutili zed sanctioned posts of Lecturers in other department, to accommodate those who are working in non sanctioned posts in a needy subject, it is clear from the sta nd of the college authorities that there is no justification for converting any of the available posts in the college, to Geography department, where the petiti oner is serving in a non sanctioned post. 9. Furthermore, since sanctioning of post can be considered only by the Gov ernment under applicable norms and the decision has financial implication, I see no basis for this Court to order sanctioning of post of lecturer in the college , to accommodate the petitioner. 10. Notwithstanding the above, considering the absence of the petitioner, th e case is dismissed for non prosecution, rather than on merit. It is ordered acc ordingly.