TUNMONI BORA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
STATE OF ASSAM
Click here to view full judgement.
Prasanta Kumar Deka, J. -
(1.) Heard Ms. R Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, Mr. TJ Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. I Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7, Mr. BD Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. NH Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.
(2.) The present petitioner was a candidate for the post of Statistical Assistant (Regular) as against the advertisement of the Directorate of Social Welfare, Assam dated 24.02014. Being aggrieved with the Notice bearing No. DSW (ICDS) E/ 128/ 2014/ 85 dated 17.02016 whereby the result of successful candidates on the basis of written test held on 13.12015 and the viva-voce dated 18.01.2016 to 20.01.2016 was declared against the existing vacant posts as published in the advertisement dated 24.02014 is challenged. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition as the candidates bearing Roll Nos. 150811905, 150811274, 150811379 and 150811687 to the post of Statistical Assistant (Regular) were put in the select list illegally. It is stated that the said 4 (four) candidates bearing the said roll numbers did not qualify in the written test as reflected in the Notification dated 17.02.2016. In spite of that the said four candidates got selection for the post of Statistical Assistant (Regular) under some extraneous consideration and on the other hand, the petitioner who was duly qualified in the written test was not selected for the said post. Such large scale illegalities and irregularities in selecting candidates for the posts of Statistical Assistant (regular) have deprived the genuine qualified candidates from getting selected for the said post. It is further submitted that total 125 numbers of candidates were selected for viva-voce and the said viva-voce test were conducted in a single day thereby giving no time to the interview board to assess the merit and suitability of the candidates to hold the posts thereby making the entire selection process a mere farce and the authorities have selected candidates on pick and choose basis under some extraneous consideration. It would not be out of place to mention here that though the petitioner challenged the inclusion of the 4 (four) candidates bearing the aforesaid roll numbers, they are not impleaded in this writ petition on the ground that their names could not be collected at the time of filing the writ petition. On 24.02.2016, this writ petition was taken up for motion and this court after issuing notices was satisfied to stay the selection of the 4 (four) candidates bearing the aforesaid roll numbers to the post of Statistical Assistant (regular).
(3.) Having come to know about the said interim order, the present respondent No. 4 filed an application for his impleadment in this writ petition and the said application was registered as I.A. No. 1569/2016. The roll number of the respondent No. 4 is 150811687. Similarly, the rest of the respondents who were later on impleaded as respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 also filed an impleadment petition which was registered as I.A. (Civil) No. 439/2018. The roll numbers of the said respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 are respectively 150811905, 150811274 and 150811379. After their impleadment, the respondent No. 4 preferred I.A. No. 1570/2016 for vacating the stay order passed on 24.02.2016. Similarly, the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 also preferred I.A.(Civil) No. 2106/2018 for vacating the stay order dated 24.02.2016. The respondent No. 1, State of Assam represented by the CommissionerSecretary, Social Welfare Department, also filed I.A. No. 1002/2016 for vacating stay order dated 24.02.2016. In the mean time, the respondent No. 2, the Director of Social Welfare also filed his affidavit-in-opposition on 09.09.2016. Vide order dated 106.2016 passed in I.A. No. 1002/2016, this court decided to take up all the interlocutory applications at the stage of admission hearing. Such being the position, as the matter has been taken up for admission hearing, the interlocutory applications for stay vacating are taken up considering the contents therein of the private respondents to be the respective affidavit-in-opposition. In between, the records were directed to be called for but as there was an investigation carried out by Chief Minister Vigilance Cell, there is a delay in producing the said record, however, the same is placed before this court today and on consent of all the learned counsel this writ petition is taken up for disposal.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.