Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Manish Choudhury, J.
Miss Manashi Hazarika D/o Sri Bipul Hazarika - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Assam, Represented by The Chief Secretary, To The Government of Assam, Dispur, Guwahati - Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 5430, 6730 of 2016
Decided On : 08-09-2022
Constitution of India ,1950 - Article 309 - Assam Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act, 2005 - Section 7, 7[1] , 7[1][g] - Assam Stenographers Service Rules, 1995 - Rule 2[a] , 3[1], 3[2] , 5, 6, 6[1], 8, 25 - Pointing Authority - Cadre and Status - Stenographer, Grade-III appointed in other State Government offices shall be deemed to constitute separate cadres in respective grades in respect of each such office - Methods of recruitment to various cadres including Stenographer, Grade-III, have been outlined - Method of recruitment in cadre of Stenographer, Grade-III is direct recruitment in accordance with provision - Stated that appointment to cadre of Stenographer - Academic qualification of a candidate for appointment to each cadre shall be as prescribed by Government from time to time – Private respondents have acquired required qualification in meantime, has, by clear implication, refused to exercise power of relaxation – Recruiment and conditions of service of persons serving the union or a state - Whether in meantime, two respondents have acquired required qualification - Whether they should be given opportunity to acquire the same - Whether applicants including two private respondents had acquired the required qualification or not – It was observed by applying the doctrine of serverability that the list of valid candidates recommended duly by an Expert Body of the Commission was held to have the enforcibility minus those candidates who were found ineligible due to their over-age or below experience limit prescribed in the advertisement. (Para 32).
Findings of the Court: In [supra] was in relation to selection and appointment of Principals in three Medical Colleges in Assam by Assam Public Service Commission - Select list containing the names of recommended candidates, prepared by Commission, was under challenge there and entire select list was set aside by a Single Judge holding that some of candidates selected and recommended by Commission were found to be ineligible - question that arose in intra-court appeal was - It was observed that it would be permissible to maintain the select list retaining the names of the eligible candidates by severing ineligible candidates and it would not be contrary to accepted norms of selection procedure - Accordingly, it was observed by applying doctrine of serverability that list of valid candidates recommended duly by an Expert Body of Commission was held to have enforcibility minus those candidates who were found ineligible due to their over-age or below experience limit prescribed in advertisement
Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
In the two writ petitions, an order dated 18.08.2016 passed by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam [GoA], General Administration Department [GAD] has been put to challenge, from two separate fronts. The challenges are made to the impugned order dated 18.08.2016 by – [i] the petitioner in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5430/2016 on one hand; and [ii] the two petitioners in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 6730/2016, who are also arraigned as the respondent no. 6 and the respondent no. 7 respectively in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5430/2016, on the other hand. For the sake of easy reference, the petitioner in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5430/2016 is being referred to hereinafter as ‘the petitioner’ and the two petitioners in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 6730/2016 are being referred to hereinafter as ‘the private respondents’.
2. The facts which are found necessary and relevant for determination of the issues raised in the two writ petitions can be narrated, in short, as follows :
2.1. The Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji published an advertisement on 04.04.2007 inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up a number of posts including two posts of Stenographers, in the amalgamated establishment of the Deputy Commissioner’s Office, Dhemaji. But in the said recruitment process, no qualified candidate to fill up the posts of two Stenographers could be found.
2.2. Thereafter the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji published another Advertisement on 27.02.2008 specifically to fill up two nos. of vacancies in the post of Stenographer in the amalgamated establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji. It was mentioned in the Advertisement that the essential educational qualification would be HSSLC examination or an equivalent examination of recognized University or Board with shorthand and typing speeds of 80 & 30 words per minute respectively. Preference would, however, be given to candidates with diploma in computer and knowledge of word processing. The scale of pay for the post of Stenographer was mentioned in the Advertisement as Rs. 3850-90-4480-120-4600-EB-120-5200-175-6600-250-7350/- p.m. and other allowances as admissible under the Rules. In the Advertisement, it was laid down that the appointment against the sanctioned vacant posts would be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 7[1][g] of the Assam Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act, 2005 [‘the AFRBM Act, 2005’, for short]. It was further mentioned that the appointment would be made after getting necessary approval from the GAD, GoA.
3. In response to the Advertisement dated 27.02.2008, a number of candidates including the petitioner and the two private respondents, had submitted their candidatures. In the selection process undertaken pursuant to the Advertisement dated 27.02.2008, the petitioner, the private respondents and a number of other candidates whose applications were accepted, were allowed to participate. After completion of the selection process, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji by two orders of appointment, both dated 17.06.2008, appointed the private respondents as Stenographer [Under Qualified] against the two advertised sanctioned posts of Stenographer in the scale of pay of Rs. 3010-60-3490-90-3850-EB-90-4480-120-5200-175-6075/- p.m., which was lower than advertised scale of pay of Rs. 3850-90-4480-120-4600-EB-120-5200- 175-6600-250-7350/- p.m.
4. Aggrieved by the said two orders of appointment whereby the private respondents were given appointments as Stenographers [Under Qualified] in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji against the two posts advertised as Stenographer with pay scale : Rs. 3850-90-4480-120-4600-EB120-5200-175-6600-250-7350/- p.m. the petitioner in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 5430/2016 along with four other petitioners challenged the said orders of appointment of the private respondents by instituting a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 3197/2008. After hearing
Selection process was not culminated with the appointment of candidates and at the time challenge was made, only the select list of candidates recommended by Commission was prepared and no appointmen....
The court ruled that only eligible Stenographer Grade-II candidates, not Grade-III, can be considered for promotions to Stenographer Grade-I, enforcing adherence to the Shetty Commission's recommenda....
Promotional selections for Stenographer Grade-I must strictly adhere to the Shetty Commission recommendations, prioritizing Stenographer Grade-II candidates based on binding Supreme Court mandates.
It clearly emerges that in the event the performance of ineligible candidates in the written examination, held on are taken into consideration in shortlisting the candidates for personality test/inte....
The appointments of Grade-IV staff must comply with statutory requirements, and failure to adhere results in illegality, leading to dismissal without entitlements to remuneration.
The court upheld the state's relaxation of recruitment rules for employees lacking qualifications, asserting that such measures can mitigate undue hardship while respecting public service needs.
The retrospective application of administrative guidelines to recruitment processes initiated prior to those guidelines' issuance is unlawful and violates principles of natural justice.
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
