AMLAN JYOTI BAROOAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions having raised similar questions of law on more or less identical facts, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) The facts being largely similar, an enumeration of the essential facts in the first of the cases filed, i.e., WP(C)628/01 would suffice and may be taken as illustrative of the facts of the other cases.

(3.) On 6.9.1997, an advertisement was published in the new spapers inviting applications for filling up the posts of Sub Inspector of Police (Armed Branch and Unarmed Branch). In the advertisement, it was mentioned that the total number of vacancies likely to occur are 112. Under Clause 7 of the advertisement issued, eligible candidates were required to appear in a written test consisting of one paper of 3 hours duration. Candidates, who qualified in the written test were required to appear in a physical test and in an interview to be conducted on subsequent dates. The petitioner applied pursuant to the said advertisement dated 6.9.97 and by a communication dated 18.3.98, he was informed that the written test would be held on 26.4.98 and that the physical test would be held thereafter on 27/28.4.98. According to the petitioner, he appeared in the written test on the above date but no physical test was held and instead he was asked to wait till the outcome of the written test. On 19.4.99, the petitioner was informed that he would not be required to appear at an interview and further that in case he was selected in the interview, he would be called forphysical test. The interview was to be held on 26.5.99. According to the petitioner, he appeared in the interview and thereafter no further intimation was sent to him. On enquiries being made, the petitioner was informed that pursuant to the selection held, the first batch of appointments had already been made and that he should wait for the next round of appointments. As in t he meantime, t he petitioner could come to know from the news papers that another batch of 84 persons were proposed to be appointed as Sub Inspector of Police, the instant writ application was filed While entertaining the present writ petition, this Court by an interim order dated 2.2.2001 has directed that until further orders, no appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police should be made. The aforesaid interim order was subsequently vacated by this Court on 1.3.2001 and though in some other writ proceedings, orders to similar effect were reiterated by this Court, 84 further appointments to the post of sub Inspector of Police was made by the Respondent authority on 1.3.2001 itself. The validity of the aforesaid 84 appointments made on 1.3.2001 (according to the State though appointments were offered to 84 candidates only 76 actually joined), is the subject matter of challenge in the present bunch of cases.