Gauhati High Court
Jahirul Hoque vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors on 3 May, 2019
Author: N. Kotiswar Singh
Bench: N. Kotiswar Singh
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010199662017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 4664/2017
1:JAHIRUL HOQUE
S/O- MD. ESER ALI, R/O- VILL- GERAMARI PART-II BALADMARA, P.O-
GERAMARI, P.S- GAURIPUR, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 2 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM,
JUDICIAL DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006
2:THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
DHUBRI
DIST- DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 783301
3:THE SELECTION BOARD
REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
DHUBRI
PIN- 78330
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S DIHINGIA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. U K NAIR (SC, GAUHATI HIGH COURT)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH
ORDER
Date : 03-05-2019 Heard Mr. D.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.P. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Gauhati High Page No.# 2/3 Court as well as Mr. D. Nath, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate for State respondent.
2. Respondent No. 2 has filed the affidavit-in-opposition.
3. The prayer made in this petition is for giving appointment to the petitioner in terms of his position in the waiting list prepared for appointment to two advertised posts of Process Server vide Advertisement dated 22.03.2016.
4. According to the petitioner, some more vacancies apart from the aforesaid 2 (two) vacant posts of Process Server became available during the recruitment process. The petitioner claims that the petitioner has been placed at Serial No. 3 of the Waiting List and two persons above him in the waiting list have been given appointment to the two such vacancies arising during the recruitment process. Accordingly, the petitioner is claiming for appointment to the vacant post of Process Server which became available after the recruitment process was initiated as has been done in case of two persons in the waiting list.
5. In this regard, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted a representation to the authorities on 17.07.2017 highlighting the fact that persons in the waiting list have been given appointment to vacancies which had arisen during the recruitment process and as such, being similarly situated as those in the waiting list, he also deserves to be appointed against the vacancy which had arisen during the recruitment process.
6. This Court is of the view that this is an aspect which the appointing authority can consider.
7. Since, the advertised posts had been filled up by the persons in the select list, as to whether vacancies arising during the recruitment process can be filled up by candidates in the waiting list is an issue which the appointing authority can consider and pass appropriate orders in this regard, more so when others in the waiting list were appointed against vacancies accruing during the recruitment process.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, respondent No. 2 to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 17.07.2017 in the light of the submission made that persons in the waiting list have been already given appointment to vacancies accruing during the recruitment Page No.# 3/3 process.
9. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken by the respondent No. 2 preferably within a period of one month from today by issuing a speaking order in this regard.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant