DASHIMTI KHARKONGOR Vs. MEGHALAYA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal arises out of the order passed by the learned single judge in a writ petition filed by the appellant, challenging the selection process adopted by the State respondents for the post of State Organizer (Scouts and Guides).

(2.) The main grievance of the appellant in the writ petition was that although the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were not eligible for the said post and their applications were initially rejected, they were subsequently permitted to take part in the selection process and have since been selected as State Organizer (Scouts and Guides). Learned counsel also submitted that the writ petition was filed after it came to the knowledge of the writ petitioner through various RTI applications. The respondent Nos.4 and 5, especially the respondent No.4, lacked the required experience as mandated by the advertisement. It is further submitted that the acceptance by the State respondents in accepting the candidature of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 was done illegally, the entire selection process thus stands vitiated and directions be passed upon the respondents Nos.1 to 3 (hereinafter referred to as "State respondents") to initiate a fresh selection process. A prayer was also made for an inquiry into the circumstances, resulting in the acceptance and appointment of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the said post.

(3.) The writ petition was contested by the State respondents as well as the private respondents. The maintainability of the writ petition was raised as a preliminary objection on the ground that the writ petitioner, only challenged the selection process and not the letter of appointment dtd. 20/11/2023 and they have already been appointed and they are in service. The writ petitioner does not have the eligibility criteria and a writ petition in the instance of ineligible and disqualified candidate is not maintainable in law.