TAMSIN T. SANGMA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These bunch of writ petitions, which are detailed herein below, being similar in facts and circumstances are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_13_LAWS(MEGH)5_2024_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The above noted writ petitioners pursuant to an advertisement dtd. 12/11/2009, inviting eligible candidates for a walk in interview for appointment, to the post of Lady Supervisors as a special drive for Garo Hills Division under ICDS Projects on temporary basis, on the condition that their appointment in a regular manner was contingent upon selection by the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC)/District Selection Committee, had appeared for the same and on being successful were given temporary appointment. Their appointments thereafter, as Lady Supervisors under the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), under Regulation 3(f) of the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (Limitation of Function) Regulation, was then duly approved by the Cabinet on 15/1/2010.

(3.) The petitioners thereafter, were posted to their respective place of postings, after being given appointment vide order dtd. 23/2/2010, for a period of 1(one) year, and were also sent for job training course for Lady Supervisor, and after completion of the same, started discharging their duties. The respondent No. 2, by letter dtd. 18/1/2011, then wrote to the Chairman of the District Selection Committee, East Garo Hills and West Garo Hills for issuance of advertisement and to conduct interview for the post of Lady Supervisor, but however, as the same was not forthcoming by office order dtd. 15/7/2011, the services of the petitioners and other similarly situated employees were extended for another period of 1(one) year. However, out of all the candidates who were appointed on 22/2/2010, 3(three) candidates were called for personal interview by the District Selection Committee, South Garo Hills on 24/1/2011, without there being an advertisement, but on being found suitable were recommended and thereafter given appointment by the respondent No. 2, on a regular basis.