BALEN BAISHYA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal has been presented against the order dated 19.12.96 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Rule No.6273/96, whereby, while issuing rule, the learned Single Judge refused to grant the interim relief as prayed for by the writ petitioner' appellant, seeking to restrain the respondents from proceeding with the selection of candidates for the post of Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department scheduled to be held on 26.12.96 pending disposal of the petition. Alternatively, to consider the case of Respondents No. 1 to 4 for such promotion, by adopting sealed cover procedure. Hence, this appeal.

(2.) When the appeal was listed for admission on 20.12.96, a Division Bench of this Court ordered that no final orders for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, shall be passed without the leave of the Court.

(3.) As the hearing for the appeal proceeded, almost day-to-day, barring an interruption for reconstitution of the Bench (as it turned out that one of Hon'ble Judge happened to be a counsel for one of the aspirants to the post) it came to notice that apart from the writ petitioner - appellants, other claimants to the post of Chief Engineer had also filed similar writ petitions. With a view to avoid any conflict of orders such petitions were also directed to be listed alongwith this appeal. They were accordingly listed. These petitions are - Ranjit Kalita -Vs- State of Assam & Ors. Civil Rule No.6141/96 and Kamal Chandra Borthakur -Vs- State of Assam & Ors. Civil Rule No. 1026/97. The Respondent State come out with its case by way of a petition for vacating the order dated 20.12.96 as passed in this Appeal. It was registered as Misc Case No.38/97. Shri P.K. Duarah, who has been holding the charge of the post of Chief Engineer w.e.f. 22.8.96 (as claimed by him) filed a petition (registered as Misc.Case No.39/97) complaining that he had not been made a party either in the writ petition or the appeal. It is his case that a meeting of the Selection Committee held on 19.2.97 he has been found eligible for promotion and it was his understanding that his name has been approved by the appointing authority. It is his case that but for the order dated 20.12.96 as passed by this Court, he would have been regularly promoted. He, therefore, prayed not only for being impleaded as a party, but also vacating the order dated 20.12.96 for which a separate petition has been filed by him registered as Misc. Case No.40/ 97.