The Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the selection process for Excise Constable posts. The court held the petition was not maintainable due to the non-impleadment of successful candidates and because disqualified candidates cannot challenge the process thereafter.
No relief granted; writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010008792016
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/903/2016
RANJIT CH. DEKA and ANR. S/O- LT. KANAK CH. DEKA, R/O VILL.- NABURKA, P.O.- KSHUDRADIMU, DIST.- KAMRUP R, ASSAM.
2: SIRAJUL ISLAM S/O- FEDDUS ALI R/O VILL.- HALAPAKURI P.O.- HOWLY DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EXCISE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6.
2:THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GHY - 6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE KAMRUP R ASSAM.
5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE BARPETA ASSAM
Page No.# 2/7
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P K DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : MR.P N GOSWAMI
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY JUDGMENT
16-09-2022
By invoking the extra-ordinary and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the instant writ petition has been preferred by two petitioners seeking inter alia cancellation of the entire process of selection that was undertaken pursuant to an Advertisement dated 28.11.2014 for filling up of 54 [fifty-four] nos. vacancies in the of post of Excise Constable in the Department of Excise, Government of Assam, and also for a direction to the respondent authorities in the Excise Department, Government of Assam to hold a fresh selection process for filling up of those 54 [fiftyfour] nos. of vacancies in the post of Excise Constable.
Page No.# 3/7
Advertisement also prescribed about the physical attributes to be possessed by the male candidates and the female candidates for the post of Excise Constable.
Page No.# 4/7
doors of the Court complaining of injustice, it would be apposite if the respondent authorities would reconsider the case of the petitioners, if necessary by holding a fresh race. This Court was of the view that if such a decision was contemplated, adequate time should be given not only to the petitioners but to such other candidates who might have similar grievances like those of the petitioners in the two writ petitions and conduct of such fresh race should be taken within 31.08.2015. With such observations, the two writ petitions were disposed by an order dated 14.08.2015.
Page No.# 5/7
W.P.[C] no. 218/2016 but they withdrew the writ petition on 22.01.2016 with the liberty to file afresh. In the backdrop of the afore-mentioned events, this writ petition has been preferred with the aforesaid prayers on 09.02.2016.
Page No.# 6/7
their pleadings.
Page No.# 7/7
for the 54 [fifty-four] nos. of posts of Excise Constable so advertised. Though the writ petition was preferred on 09.02.2016, that is, before the declaration of the results by the notification dated 01.03.2016, the two petitioners during the period subsequent to 01.03.2016, that is, a period of about more than six years have not taken any steps to implead any of those candidates selected for 54 [fifty-four] nos. of posts of Excise Constable, more particularly, the seven nos. of selected candidates against whom they have brought allegations in this writ petition. In the event the present writ petition is to be allowed the persons likely to be affected are the 54 [fifty-four] nos. of selected candidates. It is settled that a Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to hear and dispose of a writ petition without the persons who would be vitally effected by judgment before it as respondents or at-least some of them being before it as respondents in a representative capacity if their number is too large to join them as respondents individually and if the petitioners refuse to so join them, the High Court ought to dismiss the petition for non-joinder of necessary parties. A reference in this regard can be made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Prabodh Verma and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in [1984] 4 SCC 251. This being the settled legal position, non-impleadment of the selected candidates for the posts of Excise Constable, declared by the notification dated 01.03.2016, who have, in the meantime, joined in those posts and have been serving since then, is found as a fatal one and no relief can be granted to the petitioners in the instant writ petition because a writ petition challenging the selection and appointment to those 54 [fifty-four] nos. of posts without impleading the selected candidates is found to be not maintainable.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
3 issues framed by the court
Whether writ petitions challenging a completed selection process without the impleadment of successful candidates are maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Whether candidates who are disqualified at the physical fitness stage can challenge the subsequent selection process.
Whether a candidate who participated in the selection process can challenge the process after being declared unsuccessful.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prabodh Verma and others vs. State of Uttar PradeshReferred¶40
Prabodh Verma and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in [1984] 4 SCC 251 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ranjit Ch. Deka and Anr.
The State of Assam
Manish Choudhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
