DR ANURUDHAY BAYAN vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS Advocate - SC, HIGHER EDU — WP(C)/1880/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 01st April 2026.
CNR: GAHC010063882026
e-Filing Number
25-03-2026
Filing Number
WP(C)/3608/2026
Filing Date
25-Mar-2026
Registration No
WP(C)/1880/2026
Registration Date
30-Mar-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr. Justice Nelson Sailo
Coram
Honourable Mr. Justice Nelson Sailo
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10010 - Promotion with respect to Service of Teachers of Provincialized Schools. ( 10 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Last updated 01-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DR ANURUDHAY BAYAN
Adv. MR. P MAHANTA,MS. P SAHARIA,MS. P SAHARIA, ,C SARMA,MS. P SAHARIA
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS Advocate - SC, HIGHER EDU
-
2.THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION
-
3.GOVERNING BODY OF MADHYA KAMRUP COLLEGE
-
4.PRINCIPAL
-
5.PROMOTIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE
-
6.RITAMONI BAISHYA
-
7.KUSHUM KUNJA MALAKAR
-
8.HARENDRA NATH TALUKDAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice Nelson SailoView PDF
Summary: The Gauhati High Court dismissed Dr. Anurudhay Bayan's writ petition challenging the Promotional Screening Committee's decision regarding his promotion to Associate Professor (Level 13-A) as premature. The petitioner contended he received only 40 API score against the required minimum of 45, despite evidence showing 64 marks for publications. The court found the petition premature since final results had not been published or intimated to the petitioner, and proceedings were still pending before the Governing Body, declining to direct early Governing Body meetings in the absence of specific statutory timeframes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP(C)/1880/2026
Summary: The Gauhati High Court dismissed Dr. Anurudhay Bayan's writ petition challenging the Promotional Screening Committee's decision regarding his promotion to Associate Professor (Level 13-A) as premature. The petitioner contended he received only 40 API score against the required minimum of 45, despite evidence showing 64 marks for publications. The court found the petition premature since final results had not been published or intimated to the petitioner, and proceedings were still pending before the Governing Body, declining to direct early Governing Body meetings in the absence of specific statutory timeframes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts