Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

No.

and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

WPSS No.1414 of 2023

With

WPSS No.1427 of 2023 WPSS No.1680 of 2023 WPSS No.1681 of 2023

WPSS No.909 of 2024 WPSS No.911 of 2024 WPSS No.950 of 2024

WPSS No.1945 of 2024 WPSS No.1946 of 2024 WPSS No.2030 of 2024

Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Mr. C.S. Dalakoti, Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari and Mr. Mehul Joshi, learned counsel for

the petitioners.

2. Mr. R. Venkataramani, learned Attorney General through V.C and Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Anil Anthwal, learned

counsel for the NESTS.

3. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Standing

counsel for the State.

4. Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned counsel for

respondent Nos.3 and 5.

5. Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners argued that the National Education Society for Tribal Students (“for short NESTS”) is not competent and authorized to initiate the selection process to fill up the post and in reference to this, he placed reliance to Clause 4(h) and 4(i) of the Policy of Government of India of 2010. He submits that Policy of 2010 was further followed by another guidelines issued on 13.11.2020 and as per Clause 9.3 (e) and (f), only the Society established by the State is competent to proceed with the recruitment process. He also submits that even by virtue of the Rules as framed, only the

Society established by the State is competent enough to carry out the recruitment process for filling up vacancies across the EMRSs of the respective States, therefore, the commencement of recruitment process by the NESTS is wholly without jurisdiction. In addition to this Mr. Bahuguna submits that as per the undertaking, as given before the Division Bench, there is a categorical assertion of the NESTS that the recruitment process is being commenced to fill up the vacancies, which are not occupied by the petitioners, who are appointed on contractual basis. In addition to this, he submits that the advertisement was issued by the NESTS in July 2023, but in order to frustrate this petition an MoU was entered into between the NESTS and EMRS Society of Uttarakhand on 20.08.2023, that too after the issuance of the advertisement and by this MoU, the NESTS, took the task of recruitment process, to fill up vacancies communicated by State/UT Societies. Finally he submits that on or before the said MoU dated 22.05.2023, NESTS has no power to carry out recruitment process.

6. On the other side Mr. R. Venkataramani, learned Attorney General submits that in respect of the selections carried out by the NESTS, the petitioners have no locus standi and furthermore the contractual employees, who are the petitioners, herein, have been discontinued only due to expiry of the period their contractual appointment.

7. Be that as it may, in view of statement as given before the Division Bench, in Special Appeal No. 331 of 2023 that the recruitment process in question is