##PAGE1##

Page No.# 1/8

GAHC040021212025 2026:GAU-AP:466-DB

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WA/52/2025

Miss Mudang Yabyang

Daughter of Late Mudang Tayo, presently residing at Rono Hills, Po and PS

Doimukh, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh

VERSUS

The Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission

through the Secretary, Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, Itanagar

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

Advocate for the Appellant : Mr. Tony Pertin, ld. Adv.

Advocate for the Respondent : Ms. Nani Anju, ld SC, APPSC,

Date on which Judgment is reserved :05.05.2026

Date of Hearing :05.05.2026

Date of Judgment and Order : 12.05.2026

Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the Judgment? :No

Whether the full Judgment has been pronounced ? : Yes

Page No.# 2/8

JUDGMENT & ORDER

(CAV)

[Budi Habung, J]

Heard Mr. Tony Pertin, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. Nani

Anju, learned Standing Counsel, APPSC for the State respondent.

2. The appellant is a person with locomotor disability and is wheelchair-bound.

She is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 04.12.2025 passed by the

learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 364 of 2025, whereby the writ petition was

partly allowed and the punishment of debarment imposed by the State Public

Service Commission vide order dated 24.07.2025, debarring the writ petitioner for a

period of one year from appearing in all examinations conducted by the APPSC,

was modified to the period already undergone as on the date of delivery of the

judgment.

3. The relevant operative portion of the said judgment, being relevant for the

present purpose, is reproduced below:

“Para-41-Having said that it must also be kept in sight that the

petitioner is the person with benchmark Locomotor disability and is wheel-chair

bound. The portioner is a young citizen of State of Arunachal Pradesh and

although she has fairly admitted in her reply that she did posses the mobile

phone during the period of examination but there being no materials placed by

the APPSC to show that the petitioner had used mobile phone during the course

of the examination within the examination hall or even outside, therefore, this

Court considers the imposition of punishment of debarment for a period of one

year to be harsh.

42. As held in Om Kumar (supra) that where the situation demands,

the quantum of punishment can be suitably moulded by the writ Court although

Page No.# 3/8

it is primarily within the domain of the administrative authority as the Writ Court

is well empowered to decide on the question of quantum of punishment; while

for the reasons discussed, this Court rejects the contentions on behalf of the

writ petitioner. However, this Court considers it appropriate to mould the relief

to the extent that under the facts and circumstances of the case, the

punishment undergone so far in the opinion of the Court is considered be

sufficient. The impugned order to the extent it imposes debarment for a period

of one year is therefore modified to the extent of the period undergone by the

petitioner till the date of delivery of the judgment. The impugned order of

debarment of one year is accordingly suitably modified in terms of the above.

The petitioner will now be able to appear for any such examination conducted

by the APPSC subject to fulfillment of provisions of law.”

4. The grievance of the appellant in this appeal is that, although the learned

Single Judge found the punishment of one-year debarment to be harsh, the relief

was moulded by adopting the date of pronouncement of the judgment, i.e.

04.12.2025, instead of the date on which arguments were concluded and the

judgment was reserved, i.e. 02.09.2025. This resulted in the denial of an

opportunity to participate in the recruitment process conducted by the APPSC,

despite the appellant having applied by filing an interlocutory application seeking

interim permission.

5. Being aggrieved thereby, the present writ