JENINDER MARAK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the petitioners, 12 (twelve) in number, challenged the validity of the appointment of the respondent Nos. 4 to 23 in the post of IV Grade coupled with a prayer for an appropriate order or direction which this court deem fit and proper in the matter and thus, expressing their great hardship in not getting employment in spite of their merit as published in the Select/ Merit List dated 8.6.95 as in Annxure A to the writ petition.

(2.) At the very outset, Mr. K S Kynjing, learned counsel for the petitioners contended, that the petitioners are successful candidates as they have been declared to have passed in the Interview/Viva voce conducted by the District Selection Committee, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar, for the post of IV Grade and as per related Select List as in annexure A to the writ petition, the petitioner Nos 1 to 12 whose name appears at serial Nos. 8,10,11,12,14,15,16, 17,22, 25,26 and 34 respectively, in the Select/Merit List and whereas, the names of respondent Nos 4 to 23 appeared at serial Nos. 702,256,54, 122, 45, 472, 251, 388,358, 203, 258, 319, 387, 245, 673, 235, 82, 327, 179 and 40 respectively, in the Select list in order of merit, but, the petitioners have not been given appointment to the post of IV Grade and whereas those private respondents whose names appeared below the petitioners in the related merit list have been given appointment by the State-Respondents without any justification and, such act of the State-Respondents is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Apart from it, the President & Secretary, Grade IV Association, Govt. Employees, East Gano Hills District, Williamnagar, also questioned the validity of the appointment of one Shri Harikanta Das (Respondent No. 4) and Shri Meghnath Hajong (Respondent No. 7) whose names appeared at serial Nos. 102 and 122 respectively in the Merit list.

(3.) Replying to the submission of Mr KS Kynjing on this aspect, Mr OS Ajar, learned Govt. Advocate submitted, that those two candidates namely respondent Nos. 4 and 7 were already discharged from services. It is also submitted by Mr Ajar that, candidates from serial Nos. 1 to 6 of the merit list were sent to various offices for appointment and they got the appointment in the post of IV Grade and, so far the case of the other private respondents, the District Selection Committee had allowed the regularisation of the services of the said private respondents on the specific request of their head of offices who reported, that they are previously working in their offices and in that respect, a resolution dated 24.5.95 had been adopted by the District Selection Committee to the extent that,