Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Sudhanshu Dhulia, Soumitra Saikia, JJ.
State of Assam, Represented by its Secretary to the Government of Assam, Environment & Forest Department and ors. – Appellants
Versus
Sri. Arabinda Rabha, S/o. Sri. Uren Chandra Rabha and ors. – Respondents
WA NO.102 OF 2021
Decided On : 08-10-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Powers of High Court to issue writ – Whether appellate court will interfere unless both sides agree for a fairer approach relief or are order of Single Judge is perverse in law – Intra Court Appeal
Finding of the Court:
In the absence of any specific conclusions arrived at by the Government through a duly constituted enquiry Committee and in the absence of any Rules governing the selection procedure and recruitment to Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPC), the conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted with. The learned Single Judge on the facts of the case has taken possible view permissible in law. We do not find any ground to come to a conclusion, different than the one arrived at by the learned Single Judge in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. As such in an intra court appeal where the learned Single Judge arrives at a possible conclusion permissible in law, the appellate court will not interfere unless both sides agree for a fairer approach relief or are the order of the learned Single Judge is perverse in law -Judge arrives at possible conclusion permissible in law, appellate court will not interfere unless both sides agree for a fairer approach relief or are order of Single Judge is perverse in law –
Result: Writ Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Soumitra Saikia, J.
1. This Writ Appeal by the State of Assam is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 07.05.2019 passed in WPC No.4532/2016 and WPC 2428/2017 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the two writ petitions setting aside the decision of the State Government to cancel the select list as well as setting aside the impugned Notice dated 17.08.2016 issued by the State of Assam expressing their intention to cancel the select list.
2. The petitioners had appeared for a selection process conducted by the State of Assam for selection to the post of Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) constables in the Forest Department, which was advertised on 23.07.2014 and 24.01.2016. The petitioners were a part of the selected candidates, whose names had figured in the selection list prepared by the Government. However, by notice dated 17.08.2016 the Government proposed to cancel the select list on the ground that such list suffered from infirmities of not following the constitutional provisions relating to reservation and also that the same is not in conformity with the Judgments pronounced by the Apex Court regarding the reservation laws and rules.
3. W.P.(C) No. 4532/2016 was filed assailing the notice dated 17.08.2016, whereby a select list was proposed to be cancelled. W.P.(C) 2428/2017 was filed assailing the subsequent advertisement dated 14.04.2017, whereby 132 post of Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) constables in the Forest Department, was advertised. The petitioners were apprehensive that in the event of the subsequent advertisement being permitted to be proceeded with, the rights of the petitioners accruing on account of the select list would be frustrated in the event the court upholds their challenge made to the Notice dated 17.08.2016 proposing to cancel the selection conducted earlier in point of time by the State of Assam for 104 posts of Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) constables in the Forest Department. The petitioners contended that there was no allegation of illegality or fraudulent act being resorted to by the petitioners or any other candidates who had appeared before the selection pursuant to which they were selected and their names appeared in the selection list.
4. The petitioners contended that the selection process did not suffer from any serious anomalies or that it had violated any rule relating to reservation and/or Judgments rendered by the Apex Court. The only ground of the government proposing to cancel the selection/select list was on the basis of a communication dated 04.07.2016 issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Head of Forest Force, (PCCF & HoFF) to the Principal Secretary, Government of Assam, Environment and Forest Department, Assam. The said communication was issued enclosing a note showing certain anomalies, irregularities and violation of the rules. The appellants as the respondents duly contested the case by filing their counter affidavits and enclosing the various communications with respect to the selection made in the select list. The State of Assam contended that the selection committees were constituted by the then Minister of the Forest Department himself. It further contended that the anomalies pointed out in the note appended to the letter dated 04.07.2016 are justified and in view of such grave anomalies referred to in the said note, the State of Assam is justified in proposing to cancel the select list.
5. The learned Single Judge upon hearing the counsels for the parties accepted the submissions of the respondents as petitioners that there was no allegation of any wrong doing or unfair practice or fraudulent activity committed by any of the candidates and as such the said selection could not be vitiated by malpractice. The learned Single Judge held that over representation and under representation of the districts mentioned as one of the anomalies is in itself not indicative of any wrong doing. It was held by the learned Single Judge t
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
