Khrawpyrkhat Riahtam v. State of Meghalaya and 3 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶1The petitioner being aggrieved with the cancellation of his appointment as an Assistant Teacher in St. Juda RCLP School, Laitiam, Sohra, is before this Court by way of the instant writ petition.

¶2Initially it has been submitted by Mr. P.K. Shati, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner that the petitioner having secured the first position had been appointed by the respondent No. 4 on 11.06.2024 but the same was cancelled by an order dated

20.06.2024. However. he submits that later it transpired that this was due to a mis-interpretation of the qualifications necessary, which was also conceded by the State respondents, but that on a re-appraisal of the matter, it was found that there were irregularities in the selection process, by which the petitioner was selected. Learned counsel has then fairly submitted that the writ petitioner is open to the said selection being scrapped, and he be permitted to participate in a fresh selection process, if the same is advertised and conducted.

¶3Mrs. T. Yangi B, learned AAG assisted by Ms. Z.E. Nongkynrih, learned GA for the respondents Nos. 1, 2 & 3, has also submitted that there were serious irregularities in the selection process, inasmuch as, a candidate who secured higher marks than the writ petitioner had been overlooked for appointment to the said post. As such, she submits that in all fairness, a fresh selection should be held.

¶4Mr. P. Dohkrut, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4, also concurs to the submissions made by the learned AAG and submits that the irregularities that had happened was due to the fact that one of the interview members had substituted the original score sheet. He also prays that the earlier selection process being vitiated, therefore the same be scrapped and the Managing Committee be allowed to float a fresh advertisement, for recruitment to the said post.

¶5Having the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the fact that all the counsels have made a similar prayer with regard to the selection process, the same is declared invalid and void, and the respondent No. 4 is at liberty to float a fresh advertisement for recruitment to the said post. It is made clear that on such advertisement being floated, the writ petitioner will also be allowed to participate in the fresh selection process.

¶6With the above directions, this writ petition stands closed and is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Meghalaya

19.11.2024 "V. Lyndem-PS"

Date: 2024.11.19 17:57:47 IST

Serial No. 06 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP (C) No. 232 of 2024 Date of Decision: 19.11.2024 Shri Khrawpyrkhat Riahtam … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Meghalaya Represented by its Chief Secretary 2. The Director of School Education and Literacy, Meghalaya, Shillong. 3. The Sub-Divisional School Education Officer, Sohra, Meghalaya. … Respondent(s) 4. The President/Secretary, School Managing Committee, St. Juda RCLP School, Laitiam Via Sohra .. Proforma Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Shati, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. T. Yangi B, AAG with Ms. Z.E. Nongkynrih, GA (For R 1-3) Mr. P.A. Dohkrut, Adv. (For R 4) _________________________________________________________ i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: