KIRAN SUMAN BAXLA Vs. KANAN BALA TIRKEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th February, 2004, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 511/2004, whereby the writ application was allowed and the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, which was Annexure -4 to the writ application, as also the examination conducted on the basis thereof on 17th January, 2003, was quashed. Inasmuch as, the present appellants were not parties to the writ application, leave was granted to them by order dated 17th March, 2005, to prefer the instant appeal.

(2.) THE subject -matter of the writ application was the aforesaid advertisement dated 29th December, 2002 and a subsequent advertisement dated 20th December, 2003. In the writ application, a direction was sought upon the respondents not to make any appointment to the post of Assistant in the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, Ranchi, in keeping with the advertisement issued by the In -charge Secretary of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, Ranchi, on 29th December, 2002 and to strictly follow the provisions of the subsequent advertisement dated 20th December, 2003.

(3.) ON behalf of the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, it had been contended before the learned Single Judge that the first advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, had been issued only with the intention of making certain temporary appointments since the Assembly was facing difficulty in its functioning on account of shortage of staff. However, having regard to the fact that in the said advertisement, a provision had been made that only the candidates having three years experience would be eligible to apply, except the aforesaid 52 candidates, all the applicants who had applied were found ineligible. In other words, the said provision was included in the advertisement so as to favour the 52 candidates, who had been appointed in the erstwhile Assembly of Bihar. On consideration of the said set of facts, the learned Single Judge was of the view that the calling of only those 52 candidates on the basis of the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, for the written examination was wholly illegal and held that the said advertisement could not and should not be given effect to and no appointment should be made pursuant to the said advertisement. The learned Single Judge thereafter referred to the fresh advertisement, which had been published on 20th December, 2003, for which the last date for submission of applications was 3rd January, 2004. It was also recorded by the learned Single Judge that no date had been fixed by the respondents for holding the written examination pursuant to the fresh advertisement. Accordingly, in order to meet the ends of justice and to avoid any injustice to the candidates, who had also applied pursuant to the advertisement dated 29th December, 2002, the learned Single Judge directed that the respondents No. 3 and 4 should hold a written examination of the candidates, who had applied against the earlier advertisement dated 29th December, 2002 and also under the fresh advertisement dated 20th December, 2003 and thereafter, the respondents were directed to proceed strictly in accordance with the Rules and Procedures for Appointment for the purpose of selecting suitable candidates for appointment without giving any undue preference to any of the candidates.