PRASUN CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment dated 4.12.2006 in W.P. No. 309 of 2005 rendered by a learned Single Judge of this court is under challenge in these four writ appeals, which we propose to dispose of by this common judgment. One of the four appellants is Shri Diptendu Bhattacharjee, the writ petitioner himself, his appeal being W.A. 80 of 2006. Other appellants were respondents in the said writ petition.

(2.) Challenges in the Writ Petition The selection procedure adopted by the Tripura Public Service Commission (herein after referred to as 'the Commission') as well as selection of 13 private respondents (respondent Nos. 6 to 18 in the said writ petition who are appellants in W.A.78 of 2006) for direct appointment to the posts of Assistant Professor in various disciplines of the Tripura Engineering College were assailed in the said writ petition on various grounds, the principal contention being that reservation of posts for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes done by the Commission after the selection and the oral test adopted as the only method of selection for appointment to the said posts are violative of articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition setting aside and quashing the entire selection and appointment of 13 private respondents with direction to undertake a fresh exercise after determining and advertising which and how many of the advertised posts in different disciplines would be reserved for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes.

(3.) Conclusions of the Learned Single Judge The conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge are-