- (1.)These appeals are filed against a common order made in SWP Nos. 875/2012, 092/2012, 925/2012, 985/2012, 1177/2012, 1578/2012, 1178/2012, 1180/2012,1060/2012,1063/2012, 980/2012, 75/2012,456/2012 & 395/2013, dated 15.07.2014 wherein challenge was made to the selection made to the posts of Constable in Photography Cadre in pay Band-1 Rs. 5200-20200+1800 Grade pay plus allowance, which was advertised by notification dated 01.03.2011.
(2.)Even though in the advertisement there was no mention about selection to be made district-wise and no mention about number of vacancies for each district for selection, the selecting authority selected candidates on district wise. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioners preferred the writ petitions and the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petitions holding that the post is not a district cadre post and they are transferable to other districts and the procedure adopted by the selecting authority is in violation of Art. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India particularly in light of judgment of Honourable the Supreme Court in Radhey Shyam Singh and others Vs. Union of India and others [(1997) 1 SCC 60] . After quashing the selection list drawn on the basis of merit obtained on district-wise, directed to re-frame the Select List based on merits with reference to all the vacancies to be filled up and give appointment orders. Thereafter State level select list was prepared and appellants names were not found in the select list, hence appellants have preferred these appeals against the order of the writ court contending that the selection should be district-wise and order of the writ court is wrong.
(3.)Honourable the Supreme Court in decision reported in 2006 (7) SCC 161 (Principal, Mehar Chand Polytechnic and Anr. Vs. Anu Lamba and Ors.) by relying on a earlier Constitution Bench judgment reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 (Secy. State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi) held that appointments made in derogation of the equality clause contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution would be void and of no effect. In paragraph No. 14 of the decision reported in AIR 2002 SC 2877 (Kailash Chand Sharma etc. etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and others) , it is held that residence within a District or rural areas of that District and preferring a local area person for public employment is in violation of Art. 16 (2) & (3) of the Constitution of India and any legislative and executive action framed or issued cannot sustain before the Court of law.