Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Takar Karlo – Appellant
Versus
State of A.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.
1. The issue which has been raised by means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pertains to the appointment of Head Gaon Bura. As per the facts projected, the petitioner is educationally qualified up to Class X and, being eligible, was appointed as Gaon Bura of Sido Village in the East Siang District on 22.04.2002. In the said village, the father of the respondent No. 3 was the Head Gaon Bura, who had passed away, and on his expiry, the respondent No. 3 was appointed as Gaon Gura vide order dated 26.04.2012. According to the petitioner, being the seniormost amongst the Gaon Buras, he had submitted representation seeking his appointment as Head Gaon Bura, which post had fallen vacant on the death of the earlier incumbent. The representation submitted by the petitioner was finally taken into consideration and the Circle Officer, Kora, vide communication dated 30.08.2016, had forwarded the said representation by enclosing a seniority list. It is the contention of the petitioner that in the said list, he was stated to be the seniormost. The matter was forwarded to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Nari inasmuch as
Procedures for official appointments must be strictly followed to ensure legality; failure to comply invalidates such appointments.
Appointment processes should adhere to operative guidelines at selection time; when such guidelines are abeyant, precedent norms applicable prior to them may be followed.
The Court established that the selection process for public appointments must strictly follow the prescribed legal framework to ensure fairness and transparency.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of public officials must adhere to the relevant Executive Instructions and regulations, and legitimate expectations cannot be ....
The court established that validly appointed officials cannot be removed without due process, and that age regulations must be adhered to in public service appointments.
A unanimous decision of the Village Council is required for the appointment of a Gaon Bura; absence of consensus invalidates the appointment, regardless of past agreements.
The court ruled that a writ of quo warranto is not maintainable if the respondent is not holding a public office at the time of filing the petition.
The selection of Headmasters must adhere to recruitment rules based on seniority unless compelling reasons are documented for deviation.
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
