STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH Vs. SOILEN PHUKAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two appeals under consideration were earlier heard by a Division Bench of this Court. By judgment and order dated 9. 8. 2005 the appeals were allowed. Aggrieved, some of the respondents in the appeals moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noticed a conflict between the judgment and order dated 9. 8. 2005 and an earlier judgment of the Division Bench rendered on identical facts in State of Arunachal Pradesh Vs. Ashok Kumar Yadav and Ors. , reported in 2002 (1) GLT 223. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 9. 8. 2005 was set aside and the matter remanded to this Court for consideration by a larger Bench. This is how the appeals have been posted before us.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, may be noticed at the outset. An advertisement dated 8. 6. 2001 was issued by the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) for recruitment to 63 posts in Group-A and B. In the advertisement issued it was clearly mentioned that as per the reservation policy in force in the State of Arunachal Pradesh 80% of the posts are reserved for APST candidates and the remaining 20% are unreserved (open competition ).

(3.) THE petitioners, who are non-APST candidates, applied pursuant to the advertisement issued and took part in the selection held. On 26. 6. 2003 a merit list of 98 candidates (the number of posts available in the meantime increased to 98) was published wherein the names of the petitioners appeared. According to the petitioners, they were awaiting their appointment orders. However, on 5. 11. 2003 the Commission published a fresh select list containing 84 names which did not include the petitioners. In the select list dated 5. 11. 2003 only two non-APST candidates were included at Serial Nos. 11 and 12. It must be noticed at this stage that upon publication of the select list dated 5. 11. 2003, the earlier select list dated 26. 6. 2003 was cancelled.