Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 2598-2599 of 2002
PETITIONER:
STATE OF ASSAM & ANR
RESPONDENT:
UTPAL BARUA
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/03/2008
BENCH:
H.K. SEMA & MARKANDEY KATJU
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2598-2599 OF 2002
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
Despite of receipt of notice, neither any counsel represents the respondent nor he
himself appears before this court. However, having regard to the facts and
circumstances of this case, we propose to dispose of these appeals with a short order.
The post of Motor Vehicle Inspector (hereinafter ’MVI’, for short) was advertised.
The selection list was prepared on 17/11/1992. The said list was valid for a period of one
year. It lapsed on 17/11/1993. The respondent filed a writ petition in 1996 after the
lapse of selection list. This fact was pointed out to the learned single Judge hearing the
writ petition. Ignoring such contention, a writ of mandamus was issued directing the
appellant to appoint the respondent to the post of MVI. Aggrieved thereby, a writ
appeal was preferred by the State but without any result. Hence, these appeals by
special leave.
........2.
- 2 -
It is unfortunate that the writ petition preferred by the respondent in 1996 was
entertained well after the selection list lapsed on 17/11/1993 and even when such
contention was brought to the notice of the learned single Judge, a writ of mandamus
was issued directing the appellant to appoint the respondent to the post against which
selection list had already lapsed. It is equally unfortunate that the Division Bench of the
High Court, in appeal, affirmed the said order. It is contended by the counsel for the
appellant that despite such a direction, the respondent has not been appointed as there
was no vacancy.
For the reasons aforestated, both the orders of the learned single Judge and of the
Division Bench are set aside. These appeals are allowed. No costs.