IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Srimati Arunima Gogoi W/O Sri Sochi Gogoi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And Ors – Respondents
WP(C) 5013 of 2020, WP(C) 8423 of 2019, WP(C) 9377 of 2019, WP(C) 8220 of 2019, WP(C) 2315 of 2020, WP(C) 8999 of 2019, WP(C) 9388 of 2019, WP(C) 8422 of 2019, WP(C) 1931 of 2020, WP(C) 8845 of 2019, WP(C) 9198 of 2019
Decided on : 29-09-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' removal orders challenged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of appointment advertisement and eligibility criteria. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court proceedings regarding appointment validity. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. subsequent orders regarding show cause notices. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. court's observations on genuineness of appointments. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. procedural and legal requirements for appointments. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. overview of subsequent legal proceedings. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 8. final court observations and directives. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 9. consequences of illegal appointments. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 10. court's declination on illegality in appointments. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 11. final directives regarding compliance and future recruitment. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 12. the legitimacy of the appointments and removals is extensively evaluated against established laws and regulations. (Para 68 , 84) |
| 13. the judgment outlines the court's decision to uphold the removals and address accountability of officials. (Para 91 , 92) |
JUDGMENT :
In all the thirteen writ petitions before this Court, the petitioners herein who were appointed as the Grade-IV employees by the Joint Director of Health Services/Directors of Health Services, Assam were removed by the respective removal orders which have been put to challenge before this Court.
2. Taking into account the reasons assigned by the State respondents in their stand being parimeteria, the thirteen writ petitions are taken up for disposal by the instant common judgment and order. Before adjudicating as regards the legality and validity of the order of removal of the petitioners in the instant batch of writ petitions, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the respective facts in each of the writ petition on the basis of which the petitioners challenged their removal by the respondent authorities. For the sake of brevity and to avoid prolixity, this Court would not be repeating the overlapping facts.
WP(C) No.1931/2020
3. In the instant writ petition, forty six writ petitioners have assailed their respective removal orders. The date of the impugned removal orders is 24.02.2020 and the contents of said removal orders are similar.
4. The petitioners in the instant writ petition claim that there was an advertisement dated 04.12.2004 issued by the Joint Director of Health Services, Dibrugarh for filling up of few vacant posts of Grade-IV under the establishment of Joint Director of Health Services, Dibrugarh and the Office of the Malaria Officer Dibrugarh. In the said advertisement, the eligibility criteria was mentioned that the candidates must have passed Class VIII examination and the minimum age was 18 years and the maximum age limit not more than 36 years. It was also mentioned that there would be relaxation for SC/SC candidates. It was also mentioned that the applications must reach the Office of the Joint Director of Health Services, Dibrugarh on or before 20.12.2004.
5. It further transpires from the said advertisement enclosed to the writ petition that the copy of the said advertisement was sent to the Editor of the Assamese Daily newspaper “Asom Spandan”, Dibrugarh for information and publication of the said advertisement in the next issue at “Asom Spandan” as well as also to the Office Notice Board. It is however not known whether such advertisement was at all published in the newspaper in question. The petitioners herein applied pursuant to the said advertisement and were issued respective appointment orders during the month of February, 2005 and March, 2005.
6. From a perusal of the said appointment orders enclosed as Annexure-2 (Colly) to the writ petition, it is seen that the petitioners were appointed as Grade-IV employees subject to discharge without notice and without assigning any reason on purely temporary basis against vacant sanctioned posts under the establishment of the Joint Director of Health Services, Dibrugarh with pay scale and other allow
Commissioner of Police, Bombay vs. Gordhandas Bhanji
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.
Long-term employment based on transparent recruitment cannot be invalidated solely due to procedural irregularities, reinforcing principles of natural justice and legitimate expectations.
The retrospective application of administrative guidelines to recruitment processes initiated prior to those guidelines' issuance is unlawful and violates principles of natural justice.
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.