AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.K. Patnaik, J.—In this batch of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioners have challenged the selection of Arts Graduate Teachers for appointment in different vacancies in Jorhat District, Assam.
The case of the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1037/96 is that in response to an advertisement issued in the year 1991, the Petitioner applied for die post of Arts Graduate Teacher and a selection was held by the District Level Selection Board and the Petitioner was selected. Pursuant to the said selection, however, the Petitioner was not appointed and instead another select list was prepared by the Chairman, District Level Selection Board, Jorhat on 31.1.96 and the persons named in the said select list dated 31.1.96 were appointed by the Inspector of Schools, Jorhat District Circle, Jorhat. Aggrieved, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the appointments made on the basis of the alleged select list dated 31.1.96.
In Civil Rule No. 969/96, the case of the 4 Petitioners is that pursuant to an advertisement issued some time in 1991 inviting applications for 200 posts of Assistant Graduate Teachers, the Petitioners applied and an interview was held in September, 1994 and the Petitioners were selected against Sl. Nos. 81, 32, 61, 81 and 113 respectively as per the select list prepared on 1.11.94 by the District Level Selection Board, but no appointment were made pursuant to die said select list dated 1.11.94. Subsequently, select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96 of 51 candidates and 21 candidates respectively were prepared by the District Level Selection Board without following the procedure as prescribed by the rules and appointments were made on the basis of the said select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96. Aggrieved, the Petitioners have moved this Court for appropriate writ/direction for quashing the impugned select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96 and also for a direction to the Respondents to appoint the Petitioners to the posts of Assistant Teachers on the basis of the select list prepared on 1.11.94.
In Civil Rule No. 751/96, the case of the 5 Petitioners is that pursuant to an advertisement issued on 4.9.91 inviting applications for appointments to 200 posts of Asstt. Teachers of Secondary Schools, the Petitioners applied for the same. A District Level Selection Board with Sri D.N. Sarma, Principal, C.K.B. College, as President was constituted and the said Board interviewed the Petitioners and other candidates and prepared a final select list of selected candidates for different constitutions of Jorhat. But no appointments were made pursuant to the said select list prepared on 1.11.94. Thereafter a fresh select list was prepared in a hasty and hurried manner on 17.1.96 and on the basis of the said select list dated 17.1.96, appointments were made by the Inspector of Schools, despite a ban issued by the Govt. of Assam in its notification dated 19.1.96 against such appointments. Aggrieved, the Petitioners have prayed for quashing the said select list dated 17.1.96 and the appointments made on the basis of the said select list and for directing the Respondents to stop payments of the salaries to such persons who were appointed illegally on the basis of said select list.
At the hearing Mr. B. Malakar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1037/96, Mr. R.P. Sarma, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Civil Rule No. 969/96 and Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Civil Rule No. 751/96 contended that no proper selection was conducted by the authorities while preparing the select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96. Mr. R.P. Sarma, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Civil Rule No. 969/96 in particular referred to the provisions of Rule 6 of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules 1982 (for short the 1982 Rules) and submitted that recruitment to the cadre of Graduate teachers can be made by direct recruitment only on the basis of interview conducted by the Selection Board. He submitted that an interview was conducted and on the basis of such interview a select list was published on 1.11.94 in which the names of the Petitioners found place. But selection of candidates included in the subsequent select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96 appears to have been made only on the basis of their academic performance in the different examinations. According to the learned Counsel, therefore, the select lists dated 17.1.96 and 1.2.96 were prepared contrary to the provisions of the aforesaid rules and were wholly arbitrary and are liable to be quashed. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners further submitted that since the Petitioners have been selected as per the select list dated 1.11.94 in accordance with the said rules, this Court should direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioners to various posts of Arts Graduate Teachers in Jorhat District after quashing the appointments made pursuant to the impugned select lists dated. 17.1.96 and 1.2.96.
The records were also produced by Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Junior Govt. Advocate before the Court. After perusing of the said records, this Court directed Mrs Anjali Bora, who was then the Member Secretary of the District Level Selection Board which had made the impugned selection to appear before this Court and to explain on what basis the impugned selection was made and the candidates were selected by the District Level Selection Committee in 1996. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 30.3.99, Mrs Anjali Bora appeared before this Court on 8.4.99 and submitted a signed written statement on 29th April ''99. As per the said signed written statement, the District Level Selection Committee with Sri D.N. Sarma, as Chairman was constituted by a notifications dated 15.11.91, 17.11.92 and 6.10.92 and that the term of the said Selection Committee with Sri D.N. Sarma expired on 5.10.94. Thereafter a select list was submitted by the said Selection Committee on 1.11.94 after the expiry of the term of Selection Committee. The said select list submitted on 1.11.94 was not given effect to. By a notification dated 4.11.94 the Govt. reconstituted the District Level Selection Committee. Again by a notification dated 11.10.95, the Government reconstituted the Selection Committee with Sri Jogen Phukan as its Chairman. The said Selection Committee prepared the select lists dated 17.1.96 after taking into consideration the performance of the candidates in HSLC, HSSLC, BA (Degree) and B. Ed course examination. Paragraphs 1 and 10 of the written statement of Mrs. Anjali Bora are quoted herein below:
1.1, the then Inspector of School, Jorhat joined on 24.1.92 and worked there upto 1st August ''96. During the period no fresh interview was held for the post of Arts Graduate teachers. The selection was made on the above mentioned dates on the basis of statements of Interview held on 2.12.91, 3.12.91, 5.12.91, 6.12.91, 7.12.91 and 9.12.91 at Jorhat, Dergaon, Mariani, Titabar, Teok, Majuli respectively as per advertisement made in 1991 by the authority for the post of 200 all over Assam (Advertisement copy enclosed).
10 The lists dated 17.1.96 and 30.1.96 were prepared on the basis of the resolution dtd. 28.12.91 under the Chairmanship of Sri D.N. Sarma.
The details marking system as follows:
HSLC HSSLC B.A. B.ED.
Passed (Degree)
Ist-5 Ist- 5 Hons. 5 5
IInd-3 IInd-3 Simple 2 (Practically
No. given 2).
The aforesaid written statement of Mrs Anjali Bora, the then Inspector of School, Jorhat and the Member Secretary of the District Level Selection Board shows that interviews were in fact held on different dates in December, 1991 in accordance with Rule 6 of the 1982 Rules. The aforesaid signed statement would also show that a fair system of marking was adopted by the Selection Committee in preparing the impugned select lists dated 17.1.95 and 30.1.96 for assessing the merit of different candidates. Further, a reading of the copy of the select lists dated 17.1.96 and 30.1.96 which are part of the records of these cases would show that the candidates of the general category (other than the reserved category) who have been selected secured 7 marks and above on the basis of aforesaid system of marking. On a query being put to the counsel for the Petitioners as to whether any of the Petitioners had secured 7 marks or more on the basis of the aforesaid system of marking, Mr. R.P. Sarma, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 969/96 and Mr. B.D. Goswami learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Civil Rule No. 751/96 were not in a position to say whether the Petitioners in the said Civil Rules would secure 7 marks or more on the basis of the aforesaid system of marking. Mr. B. Malakar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1037/96, however, stated that the Petitioner in the said Civil Rule Smt S. Thakur, a candidate of Dergaon constituency of Jorhat district would secure 10 marks as per the said system of marking. Since Smti. S. Thakur, the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1037/96 secured more marks than 7 marks secured by Debabrata Dutta, a general candidate selected for Dergaon, the said Smt S. Thakur was entitled to be appointed on the basis of her merit for the Dergaon constituency under Jorhat District.
It may be that the select list dated 1.11.94 prepared by the Selection Committee included the names of the Petitioners in the three Civil Rules. But it is also well settled by the Apex Court that mere inclusion of a candidate in a select list on the basis of a selection conducted by a Selection Committee will not confer a right on the candidates for appointment and that the Court cannot issue a mandamus on the authorities to appoint a candidate on the basis of his selection.
For the reasons stated above, no direction can be issued by the Court to appoint the Petitioners in Civil Rule No. 969/96 and Civil Rule No. 751/96 on the basis of their selection and inclusion in the select list dated 1.11.94 and the impugned select lists dated 17.1.96 and 30.1.96 cannot be quashed. But I direct that the Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1037/96 Smti S. Thakur will be appointed as an Assistant Teacher, Secondary School in the Jorhat District preferably in the Dergaon Constituency of Jorhat District within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam.
Before I part with these cases, I must place on record my appreciation for the assistance rendered by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Counsel for the Respondents, Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Junior Government Advocate in particular has taken a lot of pains in preparing statements and placing die records without which it would not been possible to decide these cases.