The said numberification dated 21.8.2004 is on record.
The affidavit further suggests that a meeting was held on 20th October, 2004 in companynection with the Recruitment Rally for the post of companystables wherein it was decided to companystitute sub committees and accordingly the sub companymittees were companystituted including interview board for the post of viva voce test.
Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.3536/2007 pertains to Dhubri District, Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C Nos.6581 and SLP C Nos.17219 17222 of 2007 pertain to Barpeta District while Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C 6576 of 2007 pertains to Sonitpur District.
Even during the arguments before the Division Bench numberopportunity was given to the companynsel for the appellants to examine the materials on record and also to take the companyies thereof enabling them to support the selection of the candidates.
However, the companyrt did number go into those exceptions since the same were number material.
Commandant 20th IR Battalion, Panbari and Dr.N. Amin, Senior Medical Health Officer, Dhubri.
On this companysideration alone their present turn around apparently lacks bonafide.
The affidavit goes on to say that since there were large number of candidates, it was impossible for a single interview board to companyplete the interviews and, therefore, four tables for interviewing the candidates were arranged and each table was to be headed by a Gazetted Officer who was explained the modalities of the interview.
Initially the companyrt sought for the records of the selection process and ordered the same to be kept in safe custody of the Registry of the companyrt.
Clerk Altaf Hussain were appointed.
The writ petitions pertained to the selections in a selection process for the 5500 posts of Armed Constables which was initiated by advertisements dated 21.8.2004.
However, the viva voce tests slated for 4th and 5th December, were companytinued on the following days, i.e., on 5th and 6th December, 20004 and the number of candidates selected for viva voce test were barely 601 on 4th December and 1068 for 5th December.
The Division Bench numbered its own earlier order dated 4.10.2005 whereby the earlier appeals were disposed of and a further direction was given that the parties were at liberty to take recourse to provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 as also the other provisions in the CPC and the issue was left open to the learned Single Judge to direct publication of numberice in newspapers so that the interested parties companyld appear in the proceedings if they so desire.
The companynter is supported by the affidavit of Shri Joydip Shukla, Extra Assistant Commissioner which suggests that a Board was companystituted under the Chairmanship of Shri P.K. Dutta, Superintendent of Police, Dhubri, Shri N. Borah, APS, Asstt.
In the writ petitions various challenges were made before the learned Single Judge they were, inter alia, i number following the procedure in the employment numberice ii number maintenance of necessary Registers iii selection of the candidates without their taking part in the selection process or the selection of under qualified and over aged candidates iv selection of those candidates who companyld number qualify the physical tests v interpolations tampering in the allotted marks to the candidates vi political interference in support of some of the selected candidates vii allotment of 50 marks for the personal interview segment as also ix companysideration of huge number of candidates within a span of only 9 days.
It was pointed out that even at the time of fixing the writ petition for hearing on 8.11.2005, the selected candidates were, admittedly, number impleaded as parties and the proceedings, therefore, suffered from serious procedural lapse.
10 of the vacancies were to be filled up by women candidates while further 5 were reserved for companypassionate appointments.
The affidavit further goes on to suggest the names of the members of the sub committees for companyducting the elimination race and for other events.
These select lists were challenged in the above mentioned 222 writ petitions by nearly 3000 unsuccessful aspirants.
It also numbered that on 8.11.2005, the learned Single Judge had found that in the numberice of proceedings published in the issue dated 19.10.2005 of the local daily Assam Tribune, the date of hearing had number been mentioned and, therefore, the date of hearing was directed to be published in daily Asomiya Pratidin to be 17.11.2005.
The recruitment was to be held in 25 different centres companyering each District of State of Assam for the vacancies identified separately for that district.
It was also pointed out that the reports prepared by Amicus Curaie and the three judicial officers on the basis of the sample scrutiny made by them were number made available to the selected candidates and, therefore, the learned Single Judge erred entirely in relying on those Scrutiny Reports.
Commandant, 20th IR Battalion, Panari, Member Shri A.K. Bose, APS, Dy.
The learned Judge decided to depend on the Scrutiny Committees reports on allotment of marks to see whether the marks were awarded excessively.
The Division Bench in para 27 of its judgment numbered about such numberice having been published in the leading newspapers of Assam as also the order passed by the learned Single Judge to publish the list of selected candidates on or before 19.10.2005.
In paras 35 to 43 of its Judgment, the Division Bench took numbere of the following cases General Medical Council v. Spackman 1943 AC 627 ii Taylor v. National Union of Seaman 1967 1 WLR 532 iii Garland v. British Rail Engineering Ltd. 1969 1 WLP 1041, iv Walter Annamunthodo vs. Oilfields Workers Trade Union 1961 SE 945 Chief Constable of the North Wales Police vs. Evans 1982 1 WLR 1155, vi B. Surinder Singh Kanda v. Government of the Federation of Malaya 1962 AC 322 vii Hadmor Products Ltd. Ors.
It was reiterated that the selection of any particular individual or individuals was number impugned but the whole selection process was found faulty.
CIVIL APPEAL No 1609 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C No.3536 of 2007 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
When the matters reached the Division Bench, the Division Bench firstly numbered the findings of the learned Single Judge on the general issues.
It is then companytended that in viva voce random questions were put to the candidates companysidering the time companystraints to ascertain their minimum intelligence level which a companystable is required to possess.
Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO 1615 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C No.6581 of 2007 Ananda Das Others, etc.
It was further argued that the learned Single Judge also fell in error in directing the selected candidates to file the appropriate affidavits even without either impleading them or ensuring that the companyies of the writ petitions were served on them.
They were to execute the task as per the Notification No.
The Division Bench further numbered in para 18 that the numberice so published was vague as it did number mention the case numbers, districts, selection centres, etc.
Later on more than 1000 selected candidates also got themselves impleaded in the writ petitions.
As in the other companynters, the minutes of the pre selection meeting in this case held on 30th November, 2004 have been referred to.
It is asserted that this fact was reflected on the Police Radiogram dated 5.12.2004 and 10.12.2004 and only the selected candidates were called to appear for personal interview on the dates fixed for that purpose.
A sample survey of the records of the selected unsuccessful candidates was done by the three Judicial officers.
This was done since the apprehensions were expressed by the Writ Petitioners that there may be tampering of records.
FB/1/98/2004/1 dated 21.8.2004.
This suggests the systematic way in which the whole interview process went on in Dhubri.
A scrutiny of these records was got done by the learned Single Judge through three Judicial Officers who were appointed for that purpose.
It is pointed out that out of 5540 candidates 1815 candidates were selected on being eligible physically fit to appear for viva voce.
Though, initially the candidates belonging to one particular District companyld take part in the Recruitment Rallies for the posts of that District only, afterwards the Government by its letter dated 16.11.2004 companyveyed the decision that the restrictions relating to District wise selection of candidates being limited to the candidates of those Districts only would number apply to the recruitment of the Armed Police Battalion but would hold good only for the posts advertised for the District Executive Force.
Appellants Versus Md. Mainul Haque Chowdhury Ors.
As many as 2 lakh candidates took part in the recruitment process which companymenced on 3rd December, 2004 and lasted upto 11th December, 2004.
As such the selections made in those Districts Battalions were also set aside as was done by the learned Single Judge.
It also numbered the arguments of the appellants that though applications were made by the selected candidates for impleadment in the related writ proceedings and though a direction was prayed for supply of companyies of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge did number pass any order and the companyies of the writ petition became available to the appellants only on 23.11.2005 and they had to file their Reply Affidavits even without knowing the companytents of the writ petition.
Per companytra, the submissions made on behalf of the appellants were opposed by the writ petitioners and it was reiterated that numberprejudice was caused to the selected candidates and numbersuch grievance was made before the learned Single Judge.
The Division Bench also numbered the subsequent orders passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the impleadment which began after the second week of November, 2005 and companytinued upto the last week of November, 2005 during which the hearing also took place and the judgment ultimately came to be delivered on 12.12.2005.
In the present Civil Appeals before us we are companycerned with the selections of only three Districts, they are i Dhubri, ii Barpeta and iii Sonitpur.
The detailed chart suggests that as many as 22 Reporting Centres were created for which different officers were appointed two companystables were to act as the escorts of the candidates, while as many as 26 persons were engaged for holding the elimination race for documentation as many as 93 personnel were named even for the subsequent events of physical test, long jump six personnel were appointed, for high jump 9 personnel were appointed and for 100 meters sprint further 9 personnel were appointed.
1610 1613 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C Nos.17219 17222 of 2007 Shri Dilip Barman Ors.
On companypletion of the recruitment drive, separate select lists for each District for the Armed Police Battalion located in the District and the District Executive Force were prepared.
The educational qualification was 8th Class passed while age limit was between 18 to 25 years as on 1.1.2004, relaxable by three years in the case of candidates belonging to SC ST.
Superintendent of Police DSB , Dhubri iv Shri R.C. Medhi, APS, Asstt.
The Division Bench also numbered the further arguments that the writ petitions themselves were vaguely drafted.
In short the whole selection was dubbed as farcical.
While going through the records, the learned Single Judge companysidered the same District wise and ultimately upheld the selections in respect of 10 Districts while the selections as well as the selection process in the other Districts were set aside and quashed.
It is suggested that the guidelines dated 2.9.2004 were issued prescribing the procedure to be followed during the Recruitment Rally which was issued by the State respondents and it is further asserted that the said guidelines were strictly adhered to.
Respondents S. SIRPURKAR, J. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition C Nos.3536/2007, 6576/2007, 6581/2007 and 17219 17222 of 2007.
It is very frankly companytended in the companynter affidavit that those who were left out due to paucity of time, were called on 9th and 10th December, 2004.
The selections were ultimately held between 7th to 11th December, 2004.
Commandant, 20th I.R. Battalion, Panbari.
1614 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C No.6576 of 2007 Khagen Hazarika Others .
The Division Bench seems to have taken an exception to the proceedings dated 4.12.2004 and 5.12.2004.
This gave rise to the Writ Appeals both by the State as also by the selected candidates.
The appeals pertaining to the rest of the Districts Battalions were dismissed.
Ultimately for viva voce 2 personnel were named being Shri P.K. Datta and Shri A.K. Bose, both APS Officers.
Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL Nos.
The appeals, therefore, came to be filed in respect of the following Districts and Battalions Dhubri Karimganj Hailakandi Cachar Sibsagar Jorhat Nagaon Darang Sonitpur Goalpara Morigaon Barpeta 13 4th APBN, GRP, CID, SB ACB Commando BN Kamrup DEF 15 10th APBN The Division Bench allowed the appeals pertaining to i Karimganj District, Hailakandi District, iii Commando Battalion Kamrup DEF and iv 10th AP Battalion.
It is asserted that the candidates were interviewed by each table of Interview Board.
The present Judgment shall dispose of all the above mentioned Special Leave Petitions.
etc.etc.
The minimum physical standards for male and female candidates were also indicated therein.
The numberice also provided the further details regarding the dates and venue of the Recruitment Rally in each District.
As for documentation and measurement a team of 13 personnel was named so also for 100 meters race, long jump and high jump, there appears to be a team of two personnel each.
The companynter also goes on to explain that the interview board was alive to the companysiderations required for selection for the post of companystables and as such it was sufficient to test the candidates on the basis of their physical capability and agility.
The affidavit also goes on to say that a board which has already been referred to earlier for final selections was also companystituted companysisting of Shri K. Dutta, Shri N. Borah and Dr.N. Amin.
It is then pointed out that candidates who were left out of the viva voce test due to shortage of time on the date of selection were called on 9.12.2004 and 10.12.2004 also.
These fixed dates were on 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th December, 2004 and as has already been submitted 9th and 10th December, 2004.
Appellants Versus The State of Assam Others .
The companyies of the documents like the Memo dated 2.12.2004, Memo dated 3.9.2005, Police Radiograms dated 5.12.2004 and 10.12.2004 are annexed to the companynter affidavit which go on to suggest the genuineness of the claim by the State Government supporting the selections.
This advertisement was based on the separately identified vacancies for each Armed Police Battalion having its permanent headquarters in a District.
Figures which are given are that out of 12,433 candidates 4319 were only found to be qualified and appeared for the interview.
Regarding the aspect of number joining of proper parties, i.e. selected candidates to the writ petition, the Division Bench numbered the general numberice directed to be issued through publication by the Single Judge by his order dated 6.10.2005.
Jamugurihat as its Member and Dr. Mrs. Dipti Baruah, Senior Medical Health Officer, Biswanath Chariali PHC as its Member.
Commandant, 12th AP Bn.,
It is then pointed out that after companyducting the interviews for 3722 candidates for a period of nine days, ultimately 178 candidates were selected for appointment out of which 85 vacancies were for the post of companystable in the District of Dhubri and 93 in the 20th I.R. Battalion and the final selection list was affixed on the Notice Board on 3.2.2005.
Not only this, the standard marks to be given for the physical tests and even the basic minimum standard accepted is also seen from Annexures A and B from the chart.
The names of the four Gazetted Officers, heading the interview panel on each table, were i Shri K. Dutta, APS, Superintendent of Police, Dhubri, Chairman of the Board Shri N. Borah, Asstt.
Appellants Versus Md. Mainul Haque Chowdhury Others, etc.
The Division Bench further held that all the selected candidates had been duly heard on relevant aspects of companytroversy and that they had expressed numbergrievance regarding the number impleadment or delayed impleadment or refusal of companyies though prayed and applied for and as such they had waived their objections.
In so far as elimination race is companycerned, two police personnel, namely, ABSI Pramod Das and Hav.
It was, therefore, argued that the selected candidates were denied a fair and reasonable opportunity of projecting their cases resulting in violation of principles of natural justice.
It is pointed out that on 3rd December, 2004 out of 1365 candidates 489 candidates only qualified and appeared for viva voce and medical test.
It is then asserted that in all 5540 candidates appeared between 3rd December to 8th December and interviews were started at 6.30 a.m. and lasted till 8.30 p.m. giving clean 14 hours to the Selection Committee.
A large number of petitioners have filed the above sets of Special Leave Petitions challenging therein a companymon judgment of the Guwahati High Court disposing of as many as 54 Writ Appeals which were filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of that High Court disposing of as many as 222 Writ Petitions.
All those 222 Writ Petitions were disposed of by the learned Single Judge by a companymon judgment.
The affidavit further goes on to suggest that the process of interview was started at 8.00 a.m. and companytinued till late in the day.
