Ardwin Lyngdoh vs State of Meghalaya

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Megh) 51

H. S. THANGKHIEW
Ardwin Lyngdoh – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S. Khurshid, Sr. Adv. with Mr. P. Yobin, Advocate, for the Petitioner; Mr. A. Kumar, AG with Ms. R. Colney, GA, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. The saga involving the recruitment to the post of Assistant Teachers in Government Lower Primary Schools is sought to be continued and resurrected by way of the instant writ petition, wherein a report dated 22.02.2021, submitted by a Three Member Committee, pursuant to orders dated 22.09.2020 in WP(C) No. 195 of 2020, is being assailed by 66 writ petitioners.

2. The challenge this time around is however, limited to the findings of the Committee with regard to the age of the writ petitioners, 46 in number, who were declared by the Committee to be age barred and the rest 20, who were found to not possess the requisite marks, out of the total number of 66 writ petitioners.

3. It is to be noted that this issue, which has seen multiple and protracted litigation before this Court and before the Supreme Court, has its genesis in an advertisement dated 10.12.2008, whereby applications were invited by the Deputy Inspector of Schools for Recruitment to the post Assistant Teachers. The process of selection culminated in the appointment of 749 candidates, which came to be challenged by the unselected candidates by way of several writ petitions before the erstwhile jurisdictional High