SURYA KR DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these civil rule are being disposed of by this common order. Although the facts are different the question of law that arises for determination is common, that is, whether a direction in the nature of Mandamus can be issued by the Court for appointment of candidates empanelled in the Select List after the expiry of the validity of the Select List and whether the validity of the Select List can be extended by the Court.

(2.) I have heard Mr. A.K. Phukan and Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners of the respective writ petitions and Mr. D. Goswami, learned Addl. Sr. Govt., Advocate and Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Govt. Advocate for the State.

(3.) Surjya Kumar Das, petitioner in Civil Rule No. 18of 1994 belongs to the Scheduled Caste community and he participated in the selection process for the post of L.D.A.-cum- Typist for District level offices conducted by the Central Recruitment Committee, Dibrugarh. Petitioner's name appeared at Sl. No.2 of the Select List belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe as a separate list was prepared for the reserved class and another list for the general classes. Although some appointments were made the petitioner was not appointed. As per office memorandum dated 15th June, 1992, the Select List remains in force for 12 calendar months from the date of announcement. The Select: List in the present case was published on 25.6.93/30.6.93. As no appointment was made: and as the Select List expired on 31.12.93 as claimed by the Government, the petitioner approaphed this Court for a direction for quashing the Government order regarding expiry of the Select List on 31.12.93 and for a direction to appoint the petitioner.