Advertisment

IASST Recruitment Fiasco: Allegations of Rule-Bending and Favoritism

The most recent controversy centers around the recruitment of two staff members—an Office Assistant-1 and a Grade-4 Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS)—in December 2024. 

author-image
Rahul Hazarika
New Update
IASST Recruitment Fiasco: Allegations of Rule-Bending and Favoritism

IASST Recruitment Fiasco: Allegations of Rule-Bending and Favoritism

The Institute of Advanced Study in Science & Technology (IASST), a prestigious research institution established in 1979 by the Assam Science Society, is currently embroiled in a controversy regarding allegations of irregularities and corruption in its recent recruitment process.

Advertisment

Located in Paschim Boragaon, Guwahati, IASST was initially envisioned as a premier research establishment aimed at addressing the unique challenges of Northeast India and the nation, under the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India. However, recent developments have raised serious concerns about the institution’s integrity and governance.

The most recent controversy centers around the recruitment of two staff members—an Office Assistant-1 and a Grade-4 Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS)—in December 2024. 

The transparency and fairness of the recruitment process have been called into question, and key figures at IASST, including Director Dr. Ashish Kumar Mukherjee and Registrar Dr. Diganta Goswami, have come under intense scrutiny.

Timeline of Suspicious Recruitment Practices

The advertisements for the two positions were published months apart: one on 11th December 2023 (Ad No. 440) and the other on 6th March 2024 (Ad No. 472). Despite receiving numerous applications from across the country, the recruitment process stalled for nearly a year.

Astonishingly, the written examination for both positions was held on 17th December 2024, followed by the distribution of appointment letters just two days later—a remarkably swift process that raises concerns about its legitimacy.

The most glaring issue is the violation of established recruitment norms. According to the Government of India’s Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT) guidelines (OM: F. No. Misc-14017/15/2015-Estt.), recruitment processes, including written exams, must be completed within six months of the advertisement. In this case, the recruitment process exceeded this timeframe, and its questionable timing and swift outcome have led many to suspect that it may have been intentionally delayed to favor specific candidates.

Unexplained Favoritism: Recruited Candidates' Histories Raise Eyebrows

The two candidates who secured the positions—Pinky Tai and Madan Das—are at the heart of the controversy. Both had previously applied for similar positions but failed to qualify.

Notably, despite scoring poorly in previous selection tests, they emerged as top scorers in this examination. This sudden and unexplained improvement has sparked suspicion, especially after reports surfaced that both candidates were seated together on the last bench during the exam and allegedly received direct assistance from a technical officer.

Witnesses claim that Niranjan Bhagwati, a technical officer at IASST, was seen frequently approaching the candidates during the exam, providing them with instructions. Disturbingly, some sources even allege that Bhagwati typed Pinky Tai’s answers during the computer test for the Office Assistant-1 position, despite her low marks in that segment.

Furthermore, reports suggest that the question papers for the computer test were openly brought into the examination hall, which is a clear violation of standard protocol. Such documents are typically sealed and should only be opened in the presence of candidates.

Flawed Oversight and Conflicts of Interest

Further investigation reveals that the recruitment process was overseen by a committee chaired by Dr. Neelotpal Sen Sharma, a professor at IASST who was nearing retirement at the time of the examination.

Shockingly, just two days after the exam, Dr. Sen Sharma assumed the role of Acting Registrar, citing the absence of Dr. Goswami, and proceeded to sign the appointment letters for Pinky Tai and Madan Das on 19th December 2024.

This swift action raises questions about the fairness of the process and suggests a deeper conflict of interest. Dr. Sen Sharma himself is a controversial figure, having been appointed as an Assistant Professor in 2002 without the required academic qualifications. His promotion to Professor-II and subsequent rapid advancement to Senior Professor—completed in just 20 days—was facilitated by none other than Director Dr. Mukherjee. Rumors now suggest that Dr. Mukherjee is attempting to reappoint Dr. Sen Sharma as an advisor to IASST, even after his retirement.

Public Outcry and Demand for Justice

The allegations of irregularities have sparked widespread concern within the IASST community and beyond. Numerous letters have been sent to higher authorities, urging a thorough investigation into the matter. The growing calls for accountability reflect the public’s outrage over the blatant disregard for recruitment rules and the apparent manipulation of the process to favor candidates with questionable histories.

The public, particularly the candidates who applied in good faith, is demanding justice. How could the recruitment rules have been so flagrantly ignored? What motivated the authorities to conduct such a dubious process, bypassing merit-based selection?

As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen whether the relevant authorities will take action against those responsible or whether this scandal will be swept under the rug, further eroding public trust in the system.

Recruitment Exam Recruitment Scam