Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 126 (GAU)

Vethita Medeo v. State of Nagaland

2015-02-05

A.K.GOSWAMI

body2015
JUDGMENT Arup Kumar Goswami, J. 1. Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. V. Soukhrie, learned State counsel appearing for all the respondents. This writ petition is directed against the advertisement dated 05.07.2014, issued by the Director, Directorate of Women Resource Development inviting applications for recruitment to the post of LDA cum-Computer Assistant under the Directorate of Women Resource Development for filling up of four vacancies. 2. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were appointed to the post of LDA cum-Computer Assistant on contract basis for a period of one year by an order dated 05.07.2011. Similarly, the petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 were also appointed as such by orders dated 07.06.2012 and 04.01.2013, respectively. The petitioners belong to Chakhesang Tribe. 3. Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that by a Notification issued on 14.04.2011, the Governor of Nagaland had directed that 25% of all categories of posts, both gazetted and non-gazetted, under the Government of Nagaland shall be reserved for the persons belonging to (i) Konyak, (ii) Phom, (iii) Sangtam, (iv) Yimchunger, (v) Chang and (vi) Khiamniungan tribes and that further 12% of both gazetted and non-gazetted posts shall be reserved for the tribes of Chakhesang/Pochury, (ii) Zeliang and (iii) Sumis of Kiphire District at the percentage of 6%, 4% and 2 %, respectively. His sole grievance is that in the impugned advertisement, there is no reference whatsoever to any reservation of the posts in terms of the said Notification. 4. Ms. V. Soukhire, learned State counsel, by relying on the affidavit, has submitted that there is a 100 point roster table indicating the position of vacancies and sources from where these are to be filled up. 100% of the aforesaid posts are reserved for indigenous inhabitants, out of which, various vacancy positions have been reserved for various backward tribes in terms of the Notification dated 14.04.2011. It has also been submitted by her that Notification dated 14.04.2011 has been partially modified by Notification dated 15.06.2012 to specifically specify the quota of jobs reserved for Chakhesang and Pochury tribes in the existing roster table. In terms of the said Notification dated 15.06.2012, 9th, 42nd, 59th and 92nd vacancies will be reserved for Chakhesang tribe while 29th and 79th will be reserved for Pochury tribe. In terms of the said Notification dated 15.06.2012, 9th, 42nd, 59th and 92nd vacancies will be reserved for Chakhesang tribe while 29th and 79th will be reserved for Pochury tribe. She has also submitted that it was specifically indicated in the advertisement that qualification/criteria will be as per existing Government norms and therefore, norms in force with regard to reservation are automatically engrafted in the said advertisement. Thus, she submits that the said advertisement does not suffer from any illegality as the Government is bound to follow the reservation policy. She has also submitted that the present posts are for 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th vacancy of 100 point roster table and therefore, one post each out of the said four vacancies, will be reserved for Konyak and Phom backward tribes and two posts for indigenous inhabitants. 5. Mr. A. Zho, in reply, has submitted that an advertisement should be self contained and in the said advertisement, nothing has been indicated, apart from reservation, regarding qualification and age. It has also been submitted by him that unless it is specifically stated in the advertisement regarding reservation, age and qualification, there is room for committing mischief at a later date. 6. By drawing attention to an advertisement which has been made part of the affidavit-in-reply, learned counsel submitted that in the said advertisement issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Head of Forest Force, reservation earmarked for the backward tribes have been specifically mentioned. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials on record. 8. The writ petition was moved on 25.07.2014, which was the last date for submission of application. This Court, without prejudice to the claims, rights and contentions of the petitioners, provided that the petitioners would be at liberty to submit their candidature for the posts in question. As an interim measure, while permitting the respondents to accept applications for the posts in question, it was provided that no further action would be taken on the applications received towards filling up of the said four posts in question in terms of the advertisement dated 05.07.2014 till the next date fixed. The said interim order was continued from time to time and is still in force. 9. On a query of the Court, Mr. A. Zho has submitted that the petitioner Nos. The said interim order was continued from time to time and is still in force. 9. On a query of the Court, Mr. A. Zho has submitted that the petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 had submitted their application pursuant to the said advertisement. 10. A full and correct disclosure in the advertisement of relevant parameters on which the appointments are sought to be made promotes transparency. It is also important to note that the advertisement seeks to achieve a specific purpose, namely, receipt of applications for filling up of vacancy. Such advertisement must address the requirement of the intending candidates instead of sending the prospective candidates to go hunting for the Rules and Regulations to find as to whether they are qualified to apply or not. It is appropriate that the advertisement contains the qualifications prescribed for the job so that there is no dispute at a later date regarding the prescribed qualification Similarly, minimum and maximum age of the applicant must also be indicated in the advertisement so that prospective candidate knows whether he or she is eligible to apply in response to the said advertisement having regard to his/her age. Likewise, it is also necessary to indicate specifically, in the context of the reservation policy in force in the State, how many posts are reserved for which backward tribe. It will take considerable effort for an intending candidate to find out as to what roster point the vacancy in question is related to. Therefore, it is imperative that the advertisement, which is the starting point of initiation of recruitment process must contain necessary particulars and information. 11. If the argument of Ms. V. Soukhrie is to be accepted that the reference in the advertisement that qualification/criteria would be as per Government norms is enough, then the question arises as to what was the necessity of indicating pay band and grade pay in the said advertisement because the pay band and grade pay would also have followed the prevalent norms. While the pay band and grade pay was rightly indicated in the advertisement, crucial aspects like qualification, age and reservation do not find specific mention in the impugned advertisement dated 05.07.2014. This Court holds that mere mentioning of the fact in the advertisement that qualification/criteria will be as per Government norms will not suffice. 12. While the pay band and grade pay was rightly indicated in the advertisement, crucial aspects like qualification, age and reservation do not find specific mention in the impugned advertisement dated 05.07.2014. This Court holds that mere mentioning of the fact in the advertisement that qualification/criteria will be as per Government norms will not suffice. 12. This Court is of the considered opinion that in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, instead of setting aside and quashing the said impugned advertisement dated 05.07.2014, this Court ought to mould the relief by permitting the respondents to publish a Re-advertisement/Corrigendum indicating all relevant information such as qualification, age and reservation etc. in the said Re-advertisement/Corrigendum relating to the four posts of LDA-cum-Computer Assistant. The respondents, while publishing the said Re-advertisement/Coercers after the directions aforementioned are complied with. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above. Disposed off.