Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/6204/2022 of DIPANJALI DAS Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS on 3 February 2026
GAHC010193582022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6204/2022 DIPANJALI DAS WIFE OF JADAV NATH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KAKAYA, POST OFFICE- KAKAYA, DISTRICT- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN- 781304. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4
GAHC010193582022
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6204/2022
DIPANJALI DAS
WIFE OF JADAV NATH,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KAKAYA,
POST OFFICE- KAKAYA,
DISTRICT- NALBARI,
ASSAM, PIN- 781304.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM, HEALTH SERVICES, ASSAM, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781006.
2:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
ASSAM
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI
PIN- 781036.
3:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
ASSAM
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI
PIN- 781036.
4:THE MISSION DIRECTOR
NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION
ASSAM
GUWAHATI- 781005.
5:THE SUPERINTENDENT
ESTABLISHMENT BRANCH
DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES
ASSAM
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI-36
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED, MD I H LASKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HEALTH, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 04.02.2026
1. The order dated 25.06.2025 recorded as follows: I. “Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not awarded the marks for the experience criteria in the recruitment for the post staff nurse. He submits that the petitioner was entitled to 10 marks under the ‘head experience’ and in the event the 10 marks was so allotted to the petitioner, she would have made included in the select list prepared for the purpose.
II. Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner although in here application had mentioned that she had 5 years experience as a nurse with the NHM authorities, the experience certificate although available with the petitioner on the date it was so required to be uploaded, the same could not be uploaded in view of the fact that there was no provision made for the same in the online application form.
III. Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel, Health and FW Department, Assam, shall apprise this Court on the next date of listing, as to whether there was a provision made in the online application form, for uploading of a experience certificate. In the event, there was no such provision, so made, the respondent authorities are at liberty to verify the contention made by the petitioner, that she has 5 years experience as a nurse with the NHM authorities and thereafter process her case further.
IV. In the event, the petitioner on being allotted the marks for the experience possessed by her with the NHM authorities, comes within the merit position, pendency of the present with petition shall not be a bar to appoint the petitioner as a staff nurse in pursuance to the advertisement involved in the present with petition”.
2. On 19.11.2025, the prayer was made for liberty to file an additional affidavit which was filed on 26.11.2025.
3. Today Mr. M Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not averse to produce her experience certificate before the respondent authorities in case they want to verify the certificates and allot her the marks required under the experience column.
4. Mr. D Upamanayu in his usual fairness has submitted that the respondent authorities are also at present not averse to accepting the experience certificate of the petitioner for consideration to her case for selection and appointment however, with the liberty to have the same verified for its authenticity.
5. This court has noticed that in the advertisement itself at SL. NO. 4 there was no indication of producing the experience certificate nor was there any indication in the till the format supplied with the writ petition regarding the experience certificate document required to be uploaded.
6. In view of the consensus arrived that regarding the submission of the certificate at this stage, this Court disposes of this writ petition directing the petitioner to appear before the respondent No.2 viz. the Director of Health Services Assam, along with the original of the experience certificate claimed to be the possession of the petitioner along with requisite numbers of self- attested copies on 13th of February, 2026.
7. The respondent No.2 shall arrange for receiving the experience certificate to be produced by the petitioner along with the requisite numbers of self-attested copies and the respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to verify the authenticity of the said certificate within a period of two weeks thereafter.
8. In case the experience certificate of the petitioner is found to be authentic, the respondent No.2 shall ensure that the marks for experience based on the certificate are added to the merit of the petitioner and thereafter the same is placed before the appropriate authority for considering the case of the petitioner for selection and appointment on the basis of the total merit acquired by the petitioner.
9. In case the petitioner is found fit to be appointed, the appointment process shall be concluded within a period of 6 weeks from the date of the certificate being found to be authentic.
10. The petitioner claims to be a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste who is entitled to given the benefit of a Scheduled Castes category candidate. The respondents should verify the same and act accordingly.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant