JUDGMENT :

Arup Kumar Goswami, J.

Mizoram Chakma Students' Union, which is a registered union represented by its President as petitioner No. 1, and the President of Mizoram Chakma Students' Union as petitioner No. 2, espousing the cause of Chakma community, which is a recognized Scheduled Tribe in the State of Mizoram under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, have preferred this application in the nature of Public Interest under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, essentially, challenging the Mizoram (Selection of Candidates for Higher Technical Courses) Rules, 2016 (for short, “2016 Rules”), issued under the Notification No. C.11011/1/2015-EDN (HTE), dated 20.04.2016, which was published in the Mizoram Gazette (Extra Ordinary) dated 22.04.2016.

2. The averments and the edifice on which the challenge is mounted and the submissions which were articulated indicate that the challenge is made with regard to the categorization of the children of other permanent residents of the State of Mizoram as Category-II instead of Category-I in Rule 5 of the 2016 Rules.

3. Vide Notification No. C.11011/1/93-EDN dated 02.06.1999, published in the Mizoram Gazette (Extra Ordinary), the Government of Mizoram had earlier framed the Mizoram (Selection of Candidates for Higher Technical Courses) Rules, 1999 (for short, “1999 Rules”). The State of Mizoram had no facilities for higher technical studies within the State at that point of time and, therefore, the Central Government had allotted seats to the State of Mizoram for higher technical studies in different institutions and the avowed object of the 1999 Rules was to have a fair selection of promising candidates by means of aptitude tests for limited seats available at its disposal. In the 1999 Rules, the method of selection of the applicants was laid down in Rule 5. We will revert to Rule 5 later and what is essential at this stage to take note is that Rule 5 and the Explanation below Rule 5(1) were substituted by the Mizoram [Selection of Candidates for Higher Technical Course (Sixth Amendment)] Rules, 2015 (for short, “Amendment Rules of 2015”). By the said Amendment Rules of 2015, children of other permanent residents of the State of Mizoram (other than the local permanent residents) were placed in Category-II as in the 2016 Rules. The Amendment Rules of 2015 was issued under Notification No. C.11011/1/2015-EDN (HTE) dated 24.03.2015 and the same was published in the Mizoram Gazette (Extra Ordinary) dated 23.04.2015. The aforesaid Notification dated 24.03.2015 was challenged by the present petitioners by filing a writ petition, which was registered as PIL 39/2015. However, the said PIL was closed by an order passed on 16.07.2015 holding that as the Notification challenged in the PIL had been withdrawn, the PIL had become infructuous.

4. The present PIL was filed before the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court at Guwahati. In the month of April, 2017, it was transferred to the Permanent Bench at Aizawl wherein the same was registered as WP(C) PIL No. 16/2017. While the petition was pending before the Principal Seat at Guwahati, the respondents had filed an affidavit-in-opposition on 14.03.2017. Subsequently, the respondents had again filed affidavit-in-opposition on 06.04.2018 when the petition was pending consideration before the Permanent Bench at Aizawl. The petition was dismissed for default by an order dated 02.05.2018. Thereafter, an application, being I.A. (Civil) 2793/2018, was filed for restoration of the petition and, by an order dated 08.09.2018, WP(C) PIL No. 16/2017 was restored to its original file and the interim stay order dated 24.06.2016 was also restored. By the said order dated 24.06.2016, the operation of Rule 5 of the Notification dated 20.04.2016 was stayed. After the petition was dismissed for default, and prior to its restoration, the State of Mizoram had filled up 75% of the seats in MBBS course as per the 2016 Rules. An application for vacating the s