MEGHA GAMO Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. Kato, the learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. T. Tagum, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. I have also heard Mr. D. Panging, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.4 to 7.

(2.) It reflects that vide an order dtd. 21/1/2021, the names of the Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 were struck off.

(3.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the notification dtd. 5/3/2018, the minutes of the meeting dtd. 9/3/2018 as well as to set aside and quash the impugned final result dtd. 26/3/2018, the entire recruitment process for 4 (four) posts of the Pharmacist in connection with the advertisement dtd. 5/2/2018 and also for a direction to order a probe into the illegalities committed by the Respondent Authorities.