FOREYEZUDDIN SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Farayaz Uddin Sheikh, who is the writ petitioner in Civil Rule No. 133/97 sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider his case for absorbing in his service as a regular Government servant- Junior Engineer, since he had been working as such from 1991, for the reasons set out in the writ petition. Learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsel on both sides, by an order dated 20th January, 1997 dismissed the writ petition for the reasons set out in the order. Aggrieved with the said order, the appellant-petitioner is seeking to set aside the said order for the grounds taken in the appeal.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the grounds of appeal as well as the documentary evidence - Annexures 1 to 7 produced alongwith the writ petition. Learned counsel has invited our attention to the orders of appointment dated 5th Feb'91 appointing the writ petitioner as Junior Engineer, and again as per Annexure-6 dated 5.1.96 appointing him as Junior Engineer under certain conditions. The argument advanced by Mr. A.S. Choudhury in support of the appeal is that although the appellant had served from 5.2.91 as Junior Engineer by virtue of the order referred to above, for a period of 6 years, the appellant was interviewed by the Assam Public Service Commission, for short, the APSC, but he was not selected.

(3.) The legal argument advanced by Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant is in regard to the provisions of the Assam Recruitment Rules of Executive Business, 1968, for short, ' The Rules' which are applicable to the facts of the present case. He submits that in a case where a candidate has been disqualified and not appointed by the APSC, it was open to the respondents to place such records of selection before the Cabinet of the Government of Assam to consider and accept his case and to give relief. Mr. Choudhury further submitted that in similar circumstance in Writ Appeal .No. 124/97 which came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court, though the Division Bench agreed with the Hon'ble Single Judge, the Division Bench dismised the appeal with certain observations made in favour of the appellant. Mr. Choudhury, therefore, submits that the observations of the Division Bench may be perused. We extract the said observations made by the Division Bench which are as follows :