Gauhati High Court Quashes Appointment Of 935 Police Constables In Nagaland, Cites Violation Of Article 16 Of Constitution
The Gauhati High Court on Friday quashed the appointment of 935 police constables who were appointed during the period from January, 2018 to October, 2019 by the State of Nagaland, without any advertisement. The single judge bench of Justice Devashis Baruah sitting at Kohima further directed the State to take steps for holding fresh selection of the 935 posts of Constables by issuance...
The Gauhati High Court on Friday quashed the appointment of 935 police constables who were appointed during the period from January, 2018 to October, 2019 by the State of Nagaland, without any advertisement.
The single judge bench of Justice Devashis Baruah sitting at Kohima further directed the State to take steps for holding fresh selection of the 935 posts of Constables by issuance of advertisement in newspapers and the said selection process shall be completed preferably within six months.
The case of the petitioners in the present writ petition was that they are indigenous unemployed Naga youth possessing requisite qualifications and eligibility to the various posts wherein the private respondents have been appointed on regular basis without any advertisement.
It is to be noted that the said appointments were made during the period from January, 2018 to October, 2019.
The petitioners submitted that on filing applications under the Right to Information Act, 2005 came to learn that out of 1140 posts of Constables, only 206 posts were filled up through open recruitment vide advertisement published in August, 2019 and the remaining 935 constables were appointed without any advertisement.
The petitioners brought before the Court an Office Memorandum bearing dated July 07, 1976 wherein it is mandated that no direct recruitment shall be made by the Departments without publicly inviting application in the prescribed procedures.
Therefore, the petitioners contended that all the 935 appointments to the post of Constables on regular basis were made through backdoor thereby denying opportunities to the Petitioners and thousands of unemployed Naga youths who are eligible to apply to the posts of Constables.
The Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that appointments so made in favour of the private respondents are illegal appointments and not irregular appointments. It was further submitted that as the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution have been violated by granting appointments to the private respondents without any advertisement, all the appointments so made in favour of the private respondents are required to be set aside and quashed.
On the other hand, the State of Nagaland contended that the appointments so made to the private respondents are governed by Part III of the Nagaland Police Manual (the NP Manual). It was submitted that as Rule 20 of the NP Manual did not envisage any advertisement as a prerequisite for recruiting to the post of constables/non-commissioned employees, therefore, the non-issuance of advertisement cannot be a ground to challenge the appointments made in favour of the private Respondents that too, without challenging the vires of Rule 20 of Part III of the NP Manual.
It was argued that the selections were held strictly in terms of the selection criteria and pursuant to the appointment of the private respondents, they have rendered their due service to the State in particular as well as also to various other States during the election process.
It was further contended that merely because of the fact that there was no advertisement, the appointment of the said private respondents ought not to be looked simply as illegal appointment but taking into account the law and order situation of the State of Nagaland, there is requirement of moulding the reliefs.
The Court noted that the issuance of an advertisement or calling for applications from eligible candidates is the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution for filling up vacancies of employment under the State, the necessity therefore, is that in order to make Rule 20 of Part III of the NP Manual in consonance with the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, the aspect of having an advertisement or inviting applications from eligible candidates has to be ingrained to Rule 20 of Part III of the NP Manual.
“Under such circumstances, this Court therefore in order to save Rule 20 of the Part-III of the NP Manual from being constitutionally invalid, has to read the necessity of issuance of advertisement or inviting applications from eligible candidates as being ingrained in Rule 20 of the Part III of NP Manual,” the Court said.
The State of Nagaland in their affidavits stated that there is a requirement for carrying out a fresh selection by issuing an advertisement and that the State of Nagaland is ready to cancel all the appointments to the 935 posts which have been put to challenge in the instant proceedings.
The Court further noted that the question of granting relaxation to the private respondents as sought for in terms of the affidavit dated August 20, 2024, other than age relaxation, is not permissible.
Thus, the Court set aside and quashed the appointments of 935 Constables as illegal and directed the State to steps for holding fresh selection which shall be completed at the earliest and preferably within six months.
“The private Respondents may be allowed by the State Respondents to continue in-service for a period of 6 (six) months from the date of the instant judgment or till such time fresh appointments are made pursuant to the selection directed hereinabove, whichever is earlier,” the Court noted.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Gau) 64
Case Title: Shri. Kekhriesilie Richa & 25 Ors. v. The State of Nagaland & 57 Ors. and other related matters
Case No.: WP(C)/189/2022