For vs State Of Tripura And Others] And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1068 Tri

                  HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                        AGARTALA
                      WP(C) 1495/2017

For Appellant(s)           :      Ms. R. Purkayastha, Advocate
For Respondent(s)          :      Mr. D. Sarma, Addl. GA

Mr. RG Chakraborty, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 09/11/2021

Heard Ms. R. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Sarma, learned Additional GA appearing for the State- respondents and Mr. RG Chakraborty, learned counsel for respondent- TPSC.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the following reliefs:

"(i) admit this petition & issue notice;

(ii) call for the records;

(iii) After hearing the parties be pleased to set aside/quash the Notification No. F.11(36-29)-RECTT/TPSC/2014(Vol-II) dated 23.07.2016 (Advertisement No. 8 of 2014);

AND also direct the Respondents and each of them to quash the Advertisement No. 12/2017 dated 22.07.2017 AND also direct the Respondents and each of them to cancel the appointments made under Notification No. F.11(36-29)-RECTT/TPSC/2014(Vol-II) dated 23.07.2016 (Advertisement No. 8 of 2014);

AND also direct the Respondents and each of them to cancel the Advertisement dated 22.07.2017 (Advertisement No. 12 of 2017);

AND also direct the Respondents and each of them to advertise and make recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor as per UGC norms in couched with the Tripura Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Reservation Act, 1991 with its all amendments thereto"

Ms. Purkayastha, learned counsel had challenged the advertisement dated 22.07.2017 (Advertisement no. 12/2017). At the very outset, Ms. Purkayastha, has invited attention of this court that the said advertisement has already been cancelled by the issuing authority concerned.

In view of this, the instant writ petition stands infructuous. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has made a prayer to the court that, from now, the respondents should notify the vacancies subject- wise in compliance with the judgment passed in WP(C) 172 of 2015 [titled as Bijaya Bhattacharjee vs. State of Tripura and others] and other connected writ petitions.

Accordingly, it is directed that the State-respondents should notify the vacancy position in a fair manner.

Mr. Sarma, learned Additional GA has submitted that the State is obliged to comply the order of this court as well as prevalent Act and Rules, as formulated by the State in the matter of recruitment of teachers in Education Department, and there is no question of adopting unfair means in recruiting the competent candidates.

JUDGE

Saikat