Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Gau) 10

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, SOUMITRA SAIKIA, JJ.
Smti. Kizukala Jamir - Appellant
Versus
The State of Nagaland, represented by the Chief Secretary to the
Government of Nagaland, Kohima – Respondent
WRIT APPEAL NO.152 OF 2021
Decided on : 03-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. H.K. Das, Advocate, Mr. D.J. Kapil, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. N. Mozhui, Mr. F. Khan, Advocate.

Point of law : Making an essential or even a desired qualification in the field of human diseases, is an afterthought. In other words, concerned authorities have changed the rules of game after game had started. This is not permissible in law.

Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14 and 17 – Equality before law – Abolition of untouchability - Principal Director, Directorate of Health & Family Welfare, Government of Nagaland had issued an advertisement calling for eligible applications from amongst “bonafide Indigenous Inhabitants of State of Nagaland” for temporary appointment for filling up posts of Junior Specialist; Medical Officer; Research Scientist for BSL Lab, and Lab Technician for BSL Lab - Whether a Chief Engineer of Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board could be made Managing Director of Board - Whether State has power to make contractual appointment or not.
Findings of the Court :
Candidates who were selected in order of merit had been removed from list of selected candidates and four different candidates had been included in list on basis of their having qualifications in human diseases - These were, however, not mentioned either in advertisement or in any other conditions - In other words, it was neither an essential nor a desired qualification to have had experience in human diseases in order to be qualified as a Research Scientist - Entire exercise undertaken by Government of Nagaland post decision suffers from malice and same are arbitrary, illegal and, therefore, subsequent actions cannot be justified.
Result : Writ petition allowed.

JUDGMENT

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.

1. Heard Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the writ appellant. Also heard Mr. N. Mozhui, learned standing counsel, Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Nagaland, appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Mr. F. Khan, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent Nos.5 to 8.

2. This writ appeal is being filed by the petitioners/writ appellants, who are aggrieved by the judgment & order dated 21.05.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.6/2021 in the Kohima Bench.

3. The Principal Director, Directorate of Health & Family Welfare, Government of Nagaland had issued an advertisement dated 04.08.2020 calling for eligible applications from amongst the “bonafide Indigenous Inhabitants of the State of Nagaland” for temporary appointment for filling up the posts of Junior Specialist; Medical Officer; Research Scientist for BSL Lab, and Lab Technician for BSL Lab. We are presently concerned only with the post of Research Scientist for the BSL Lab. The posts of Research Scientist for BSL Lab, which were to be filled were total six in numbers. Necessary qualifications for the post of Research Scientist for BSL Lab were of two categories, i.e. essential and desirable. These were as follows:-

Research Scientist for BSL

• Essential:

MSc in life Sciences, NET

Qualified & 5 years experience in

Molecular Biology Techniques

supported by publications.

• Desirable:

Experience of working in BSL-3

laboratory or

• Essential:

PhD in Life Sciences, experience

in Molecular Biology Techniques

supported by publications

• Desirable

NET Qualified & experience of

working in BSL-3 laboratory.”

4. The advertisement further elaborated as to how the candidates will be evaluated and the evaluation procedure is given in the said advertisement, which reads as under:-

“Distribution of Marks	Research Scientist	Lab Technician for BSL
1) Marks obtained in University Examination	38	38
2) Possession of Higher Qualification	20	20
• Graduate Degree	(0)	(10)
• PG Degree	(0)	(20)
• NET Qualification	(10)	(0)
• Post Doctoral degree	(20)	(0)
3) Work Experience @ 2 points per year Served	30	30
4) Viva-Voce	12	12
Total	100	100

5. The candidates submitted their particulars including their qualifications, along with the necessary documents. They then faced an interview. This Court has also been informed that all the thirty-three candidates, who had applied for the posts, were held qualified. The list containing the marks obtained by these candidates in order of merit has been supplied to us by Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 4. The same reads as under:-

Sl No.	Name	Roll No.	Marks for Academic records/ Higher degree/Work experience	Viva- Voce Marks	Total marks	Tribe	Remarks
1.	Kizukala Jamir	34	53.36	7.50	60.86	Ao
2.	Joshua Keppen	19	51.71	8.00	59.71	Rengma
3.	Visenuo Aiko	29	49.98	7.25	57.23	Lotha
4.	Dr. Toshinungla Ao	1	50.78	5.50	56.28	Ao
5.	Dr. Merino Visa	12	49.18	5.50	54.68	Angami
6.	Limamanen Phom	20	45.72	4.25	49.97	Phom
7.	Chenole Keppen	23	40.28	8.50	48.78	Rengma
8.	Ekonthung Ezung	24	40.93	5.25	46.18	Lotha
9.	Zevelou Koza	18	39.62	5.50	45.12	Chakhesang
10.	Wetetsho Kapfo	26	36.6	7.50	44.10	Chakhesang
11.	Moajungla Longkumar	30	37.9	4.75	42.65	Ao
12.	Kikrusenuo Kiewhuo	8	34.2	7.75	41.95	Angami
13.	Roolen Yanthan	35	34.08	6.00	40.08	Lotha
14.	Piyongsola	27	34.54	5.00	39.54	Ao
15.	Chiem	15	32.18	6.50	38.68	Khiamniun