COURT NO.1
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
Record of Proceedings
WP (PIL) No. 09/2020
HENNA SUBBA & ORS. PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
STATE OF SIKKIM & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
For Petitioners : Mr. A. Moulik, Senior Advocate.
Ms. K. D. Bhutia, Advocate.
Mr. Ranjit Prasad, Advocate.
For Respondents : Mr. Vivek Kohli, Advocate General.
Ms. Y. W. Rinchen, Govt. Advocate.
Ms. Pema Bhutia, Asstt. Govt. Advocate.
Date: 19/05/2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
...
JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble, the Chief Justice)
In the first order passed by this Court on 14th December, 2020, reasons
have been provided as to why it was prima facie satisfied with the information
laid before it by the petitioners required examination. The petitioners claimed to
be unemployed and stated that they had post graduate qualifications in different
subjects. They also claimed to be public spirited persons and interested in the
development of society so that educated unemployed youths are not exploited.
By filing the instant writ petition, they assailed the "One Family One Job" policy
decision of the State Government, which, according to them, failed to comply
with any statutory provision. This matter, thereafter, was heard from time to
time and affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.
In the affidavit filed on behalf of the State, which was affirmed on 16th
April, 2021, and filed on the very next day, it appears that the deponent, Umesh
Sunam, Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms &
Training, Government of Sikkim, in his preliminary submissions, has elaborately
stated about the concept of "One Family One Job Scheme", which initially
Page 1 of 3 COURT NO.1 HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK Record of Proceedings
emerged after the former Chief Minister completed his tour of 31 constituencies.
During the said tour, it was observed that the main grievance of the people of
Sikkim was lack of employment in Government service. There were thousands
of applicants seeking employment and their applications, which were received
during the said tour, were forwarded to almost all the major departments for
consideration. The respondent no.2, i.e., Department of Personnel,
Administrative Reforms & Training, received several hundreds of applications
seeking employment, but was not in a position to consider the same, leading to
insurmountable public pressure on the then ruling party and the Government of
that day. The office of the former Chief Minister had decided to conduct a walk-
in-interview amongst such applicants and considered the selected ones for
appointment on temporary posts as per the available vacancies. It was further
decided that only applications of those applicants who did not have any family
members in Government service would be considered. In this manner, the
former Chief Minister conceptualized the "One Family One Job Scheme". The
deponent, Umesh Sunam, thereafter elaborately explained the methodology
applied for the purpose of initiation and execution of the "One Family One Job
Scheme".
A bare perusal of the explanation provided by the deponent, Umesh
Sunam, in the affidavit reveals that while the relevant Rules, namely, the Sikkim
Government Service Rules, 1974, may not have been strictly adhered to by
observing all technical requirements as mandated by the said Rules, there has
been substantial compliance. More than 13,000 citizens residing in the State of
Sikkim have got employment in the process. As such, the bona fides of the
exercise undertaken under the Scheme cannot be held to be suspect since its
object and purpose was to provide one family one job.
If we are to forensically analyse the entire recruitment process at this
belated stage, that too, based on technicalities, in that event, each and every
person who has secured State employment following initiation and execution of
Page 2 of 3 COURT NO.1 HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK Record of Proceedings
the "One Family One Job Scheme", would be required to be made parties in the
present writ proceeding. That apart and in any event, the beneficial nature of
the Scheme cannot be doubted and examined at this stage purely on the basis
of technicalities as provided under the relevant Rules. However, the State of
Sikkim is directed to ensure that in all future recruitment process, it adheres to
the relevant statutory laws and Rules scrupulously and meticulously so that
eyebrows are not raised unnecessarily or accusatory fingers pointed towards the
State, while welfare and beneficial Schemes - such as the one before us - are
sought to be implemented by the State or its agencies.
While we propose to dispose of the instant Public Interest Litigation with
the above observations/directions, we make it clear that nothing contained
herein shall be construed - in any manner - as an embargo and/or fetter upon
the concerned authority of the State from proceeding against any individual or
individuals who may have secured employment under the "One Family One Job
Scheme" through fraudulent means.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Meenakshi Madan Rai) (Biswanath Somadder)
Judge Chief Justice
jk/ds/ami
Page 3 of 3
