Appointments Made Without Ad, Interview Don't Meet Test Of Constitution: Gauhati HC Quashes 40 More Appointments To Nagaland Police

The Gauhati High Court recently quashed the appointment of 40 Sub-Inspectors of Police, Unarmed Branch Sub-Inspector of Police, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police and Instructor Havildar who were appointed during the years 2019 and 2020 in Nagaland Police.

The single judge bench of Justice Devashis Baruah sitting at Kohima observed that the orders of appointment of the said police personnel were made without any kind of advertisement and without following the principles which emanate from Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

It is to be noted that the High Court recently quashed appointment of 935 police constables of Nagaland Police on the similar grounds.

The main contention of the petitioners was that State had appointed the said police personnel (respondent nos. 6 to 45) without undertaking any valid process of recruitment and without publication of any kind of advertisement.

The Court noted that an appointment made without any advertisement and any selection process or interview does not meet the requirements of Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India, as the same deprives all other eligible candidates from submitting their candidatures and from participating in the competition undertaken for filling-up such a post.

The Court placed reliance upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in State of Orissa and another v. Mamata Mahanty [2011] 3 SCC 436 and Binod Kumar Gupta and others v. Ram Ashray Mahoto and others [2005] 4 SCC 209.

The Court observed that as there was no advertisement, the said act had deprived all the eligible candidates including the petitioners herein, to submit their candidatures for the vacancies in question.

“Such action on the part of the State respondent authorities leading to the appointments of the respondent nos. 6 to 45 are found in clear violation of the principles enshrined in Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India,” the Court said.

The Court also noted that as no distinguishable feature is found between the facts and circumstances obtaining in the present writ petition and the facts and circumstances obtaining in the batch of writ petitions where the appointment of 935 police constables were quashed, the observation and directions made in the common judgment and order passed in those writ petitions are also applicable in the present case.

Thus, the Court disposed the writ petition with the following observations and directions:

1. The appointments of respondent No. 6 to 45 who were appointed on different dates in the years 2019 and 2020 by the State respondent authorities without any advertisement are all set aside and quashed.
2. The State respondents are directed to take steps for holding fresh selection of the said posts, which become vacant due to setting aside and quashing of the orders of appointment issued in respect of the respondent no. 6 to respondent no. 45, by issuance of advertisement in newspapers which are widely circulated throughout the State of Nagaland. It further directed that the process of recruitment shall be conducted following the principles enshrined in Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution of India.
3. The process of selection shall be completed at the earliest and preferably within six months from the date of the present order.
4. The respondent no. 6 to respondent no. 45 herein whose appointments have been set aside by this judgment would be eligible to participate in the fresh selection process.
5. The upper age limit of the respondent no. 6 to respondent no. 45 as well as the petitioners herein shall be given relaxation. However, there shall be no relaxation in the matter of basic qualifications as well as the Departmental physical criteria.
6. The respondent no. 6 to respondent no. 45 may be allowed by the State respondents to continue in-service for a period of six months from the date of the instant order or till such time fresh appointments are made pursuant to the selection directed hereinabove, whichever is earlier.
7. It is further observed that during the continuance of service of the respondent no. 6 to respondent no. 45 as observed above, they are required to maintain discipline required on the part of the members of the Nagaland Police Force and in case of any act of indiscipline on their part, the State respondent authorities would be at liberty to deal with such act of indiscipline in accordance with law.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Gau) 71

Case Title: Shri Kezhalesa Kuotsu & 14 Ors. v. The State of Nagaland & 44 Ors.

Case No.: WP (C)/317/2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order