JUDGMENT [1] This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the appointment order dated 22.7.2019 issued in favour of the fourth respondent and to consider the case of the other intending qualified candidates, including the petitioner, for the post of Musician (Pena) in Jawaharlala Nehru Manipur Dance Academy. [2] The case of the petitioner is that the first respondent issued advertisement dated 5.7.2018 calling applications from the intending candidates for filling up one post of each of the vacant posts of (i) Guruhan (Lai Haroaba), (ii) Guruhan (Cholam) and (iii) Musician (Pena) respectively to be submitted on or before 23.7.2018. The petitioner and other intending candidates had applied for the post of Musician (Pena) and the selection test was held on 9.3.2019. However, no result of the selection test was declared, but from the reliable source, the petitioner came to know that the fourth respondent was appointed to the post of Musician (Pena) vide impugned order dated 22.7.2019 of the Director of the first respondent. [3] Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application dated 1.8.2019 for obtaining information under Section 6(i) of the RTI Act seeking the State Public Information Officer, Jawaharlala Nehru Manipur Dance Academy to issue a copy of the appointment order dated 22.7.2019 and the certificates and mark sheets of the fourth respondent for passing the qualifying Class-X examination. The Administrative Officer/CPIO of JNMDA supplied the copies of the relevant certificates and the appointment order of the fourth respondent and on verification, the petitioner came to know that the fourth respondent had produced a fake certificate of passing the qualifying Class-X examination and the fourth respondent was appointed to the post of Musician (Pena) by not considering the genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. [4] The respondents 1 to 3 filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that the selection of the fourth respondent was notified in the office notice board and the plea of the petitioner that the selection result was not declared is false. It is stated that the fourth respondent resigned from his post by submitting resignation letter dated 2.8.2021 and in view of the request for resignation, a formal termination order was also issued on 16.8.2021 and the post of Musician (Pena) is now lying vacant. It is stated that the fourth respondent resigned from his post by submitting resignation letter dated 2.8.2021 and in view of the request for resignation, a formal termination order was also issued on 16.8.2021 and the post of Musician (Pena) is now lying vacant. It is stated that the post needs to be re-advertised as the earlier advertisement was done on 5.7.2018 and appointment was given to the fourth respondent on 22.7.2019. In such situation, the writ petition has become infructuous and the same is liable to be dismissed. [5] Heard Mr.A. Sachikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y.Nirmolchand, learned senior counsel for the official respondents. [6] The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by submitting a fake Class-X certificate, the fourth respondent got appointment to the post of Musician (Pena) and that the official respondents failed to see such fake certificate produced by the fourth respondent. In such circumstances, the official respondents ought not to have selected and appointed the fourth respondent. In fact, the said factum of the fake certificate produced by the fourth respondent came to the knowledge of the petitioner only after obtaining RTI information from the Administrative Officer/CPIO of JNMDA, Imphal. [7] The learned counsel would submit that the qualification for appointing a person to the post of Musician (Pena) is Class-X passing and since the fourth respondent has produced fake Class-X certificate, his appointment needs to be cancelled and the respondent authorities ought to consider the genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner. [8] The learned counsel for the official respondents submitted that it is incorrect to say that the result of the selection test was not declared and instead issued the appointment order to the fourth respondent. The learned counsel would submit that the selection of the fourth respondent was notified in the office notice board. [9] Drawing attention to paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition, the learned senior counsel for the official respondents submitted that the genuineness of the educational qualification of the fourth respondent needs to be verified. However, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the matter was delayed. The learned senior counsel further submitted that the fourth respondent has resigned the post and now the post of Musician (Pena) is lying vacant and that the said post needs to be re-advertised. However, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the matter was delayed. The learned senior counsel further submitted that the fourth respondent has resigned the post and now the post of Musician (Pena) is lying vacant and that the said post needs to be re-advertised. The learned senior counsel for the official respondents thus submitted that recording the averments in paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition, suitable orders may be passed by this Court. [10] At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is agreeable to dispose of the writ petition by recording the averments made in paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition. However, he submits that instead of re-advertising the post, the official respondents may consider the genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner. [11] The writ petition was filed on 19.12.2019 challenging the appointment of the fourth respondent as Musician (Pena) and after the filing of the writ petition, a subsequent development of submitting resignation by the fourth respondent was happened in this case and the said fact was averred by the official respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition. Therefore, for better appreciation, it would be necessary to quote paragraph 6 of the affidavit-in-opposition: “6. That, with reference to Paragraph No.9 of the writ petition, the answering deponent denies the averments made therein. The genuineness of the educational qualification of private respondent needs to be verified by the academy from the institution that issued his educational certificates. However, the matter was delayed due to COVID-19 Pandemic and in addition to that the private respondent has resigned from his post by submitting resignation letter dated 02/08/2021. In view of the request for resignation from his post i.e. Musician (Pena), a formal termination order of the private respondent was also issued vide order No.4(21)79- 80/JNMDA dated 16/08/2021. In such situation, the whole writ petition has become infructuous. The post of Musician (Pena) is now lying vacant and the post needs to be re-advertised as the earlier advertisement was done on 5/7/2018 and appointment was given to the respondent No.4 on 22/7/2019.” [12] While considering the appointment of a candidate for the post of Musician (Pena), it is the bounden duty of the selecting/appointing authority to verify not only the genuineness of the candidate but also it has to verify the certificates, particularly the educational qualification certificate produced by the candidate. Thus, a person who is unqualified at the time of submission of the application for the post of Musician (Pena) in JNMDA, Imphal was appointed to the said post by superseding the qualified persons like the petitioner and others. There is every possibility to come to a conclusion that only after knowing that his Class-X certificate is going to be subjected for verification from the educational institution, the fourth respondent resigned post. [13] Since the subsequent development of resignation of the fourth respondent from the post of Musician (Pena) had taken place and the post Musician (Pena) is now lying vacant in JNMDA, Imphal, the official respondents ought to have consider the other intending qualified candidates, including the petitioner for the post of Musician (Pena) without re-advertising the post, since the petitioner and other intending candidates were called for interview scheduled on 9.3.2019 at 11 a.m. at JMDA. If re-advertising the post as pleaded by the official respondents is ordered, it would not only delay the filling up of the post but also all other eligibility criteria would be changed. In such circumstances, the official respondents are directed to consider the other intending candidates, including the petitioner for filling up the post of Musician (Pena) by following the due process. [14] In the result, (a) The writ petition is allowed. (b) The appointment order dated 22.7.2019 issued in favour of the fourth respondent is set aside. (c) The official respondents are directed to consider the genuine cases of the other intending candidates, including the petitioner and appoint suitable candidate after following the procedures. (d) The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (e) No costs.