STATE OF ASSAM Vs. PROSEN KUMAR ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 30.8.93 passed in Misc. Case No. 473 of 1993 arising out of Civil Rule No. 746 of 1991 and also against the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 10.2.93 in Civil Rule No. 746/91, Civil Rule No. 1086/91, Civil Rule No. 1946/91,Civil Rule No. 1403/91 and Civil Rule No.1837/91, contained in Annexure-'A' to the Writ Appeal,.

(2.) We have heard Mr. D.P. Chaliha, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State of Assam and Mr. H. Rahman, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.

(3.) The brief facts for the purpose of adjudicating the present appeal are that an advertisement was made for recruitment to the posts of Lower Division Assistants in Assam in various State Government Departments. The contesting respondents also applied and were duly selected to be placed in the select list dated 12.8.88. It has not been disputed that the period of validity of the aforesaid select list was for a period of one year. The life of the aforesaid select list was extended by the various Government orders upto 16.2.91. Civil Rule No. 898/91 was filed by some of the candidates whose names appeared in the select list for being appointed to the post of Lower Division Assistants on the ground that the select list, even after 16.2.91 was in existence and they were entitled to get appointment as there were vacant posts to be filled up. The Division Bench, however, finally adjudicated the aforesaid matter and held that the contentions of the petitioners in Civil Rule No. 898/91, if are upheld, same would be unjust and hit by Article 14 of the Constitution. The writ petition filed by those petitioners was, therefore, rejected.