SANTOSH SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has a chequered history, is the oldest service matter pending before this Court which was initially filed on 09th February, 1990 and is being taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) In the year 1990 petitioners eight in number filed this petition inter alia contending that a select list for promotion to the post of Head Constable in the Transport Department has been published by the respondents vide Annexure P/5 in which the private respondents are included. Inter alia contending that the process for promotion initiated and the select list prepared is not in accordance with provisions of rule 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Transport Department Subordinate Class-Ill Executive Service Recruitment Rules, 1969, petitioners filed this petition. According to the petitioners, the recruitment to the post in question as per rule 14 has to be conducted by conducting a written test and holding interview and thereafter the selected candidates have to undergo a cadre course before preparation of the fit list. It is further stated that the select list has to be prepared on the basis of the result in the written test and candidates five times the number of vacancies have to be called for interview. When the petition was filed, the main grievance of the petitioners were that the syllabus in advance was not circulated and written test was also conducted deviating from the old practices in the matter of setting the paper for the written examination. Pointing out the following illegality in the matter of conducting selection process, this petition was filed: (i) Syllabus as was circulated in the previous years was not circulated, in the previous years examination is two papers were held but in the current year written test in only one paper is being held; and (ii) select list has been prepared without conducting interview and the marks obtained by various candidates have not been disclosed, no merit list has been supplied and therefore the entire selection process is vitiated and interference is sought for.

(3.) Initially when the petition was filed in tile year 1990, there was a lot of confusion with regard to jurisdiction of this Court to dealt with the matter On account of formation of the State Administrative Tribunal and the matter went upto the Supreme Court and ultimately, the matter stood transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal which was created at the relevant time. In the process of adjudication of the matter with regard to jurisdiction to deal with the matter, a lot of time was consumed and after abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court. In the meanwhile, initially, interim order of stay was granted by this Court restraining the respondents from making any promotion on the basis of the fit list. Subsequently, stay order was vacated on 27th May, 1991 directing tile respondents to keep eight posts vacant for the present petitioners while granting permission to promote the other candidates. In pursuance to the same, the private respondents who are promoted have been arrayed as respondents and during the pendency of this petition some of them have expired and the names of the respondents No.5, 9, 12, 13, 15, 19,22 to 24 have been deleted as per the orders passed by this Court on various dates.