WP(C) 3178/2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Ranjan Gogoi, J. Pursuant to our previous order dated 22.1.2010 the Inspector General of Police ( Administration), Assam, has passed an order dated 5th February, 2010 nominating 1) Shri Longnit Terong, Addl. Supdt. Of Police, City; 2) Shri Novneet Mahanta, D SP, Dispur Division and 3) Inspector Rahul Amin, Officer-in-charge, Dispur Polic e Station as members of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to be constituted by this Court to investigate Dispur P.S. Case No.1144/2007 U/S 380, I.P.C. The s aid order has been placed before the Court by the learned Govt. Advocate, Assam Sri R. Adhikari. Having regard to the gamut of issues that the Special Investigation Team may be required to be gone into and that the identity of the persons who may be require d to be investigated is not very clear at this stage, we are of the view that th e names suggested by the IGP(Admn.) would not be appropriate for constitution of the S.I.T. in the present case. We, therefore, proceed to constitute a Special Investigation Team on our own to be headed by Sri Shiva Kumar, IPS, Commandant, First A.P.Bn. Sri Kumar will be at liberty to induct two other Officers and men from other ranks as per his choice in the Special Investigation Team. We make i t clear that the Special Investigation Team constituted by this order will repor t to us and no other authority in the State and similarly will receive orders fr om the Court and not from any State authority. We also make it clear that apart from investigating Dispur P.S. Case No.1144/2007, the SIT will make all efforts to trace out the missing records, the precise details of which will be furnished to the SIT by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Educa tion (Secondary) Department. To achieve the desired result he S.I.T. will be at liberty to exercise all its powers as may be available under the law. It is fu rther directed that all concerned including the officials of the Education Depar tment, at all levels, shall cooperate and render assistance to the SIT constitut ed by the Court. The first report of the SIT will be submitted to us within 45 d ays from today. The direction in which this case has proceeded including the orders passed in th e immediate past would indicate that for all practical purposes the Court has tr eated the writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in view of the iss ues involved. Office, therefore, is directed to henceforth treat this writ petit ion as a PIL and re-number the same. We may summarise to put on record that the core issue in the case is whether app ointments in public offices have been made in a manner mandated by law. To answe r the question, verification of official records pertaining to the creation of t he posts in question and the manner of filling up the same including the details of the selection held is necessary. The stand taken by the State authority is t hat the official records pertaining to the issues in question are lost/not avail able. Naturally, as acceptance of the aforesaid stand taken by the State will ha ve the effect of pre-empting the Court from ascertaining the truth surrounding i ssues of grave public importance. The same cannot be accepted without a full inv estigation/enquiry in the matter. In the present case the records which are required to be looked into by the Cour t are those pertaining to the identity of 20 posts of Subject Teachers in Zoolog y advertised on 27.6.92 and the manner in which the said posts have been filled up. Consideration of the said records, which have not been placed before the Cou rt till today and are reported to be missing, has become imperative in the light of the stand taken by the 13 respondents who have been, prima facie, identified by the Court to be the illegal appointees against the 20 advertised posts as al so that of the several Officers who had made the said appointments. The defence, broadly, is to the effect that appointments of the aforesaid 13 persons are not on the basis of the advertisement or selection held but are regularizations of existing ad hoc appointments, if not to the extent of all the 13, at least in pa rt. In view of the issues that had now emanated which will be gone into in the PIL i t may be convenient to deal with the individual grievances of the writ petitione r, Smt. Julekha Wahida Ahmed, as originally espoused in the writ petition. All n ecessary details in this regard have already been recorded in the Court’s order dated 18.9.2008 and, therefore, the same need not be repeated. Even if the 13 ou t of the 20 appointments are to be treated as illegal, the writ petitioner, Smt. Julekha Wahida Ahmed, by virtue of her position in the merit list i.e. at seria l No.47, will not be entitled to appointment. In the event the Court finds the 1 3 appointments or any of them to be illegal and in spite of the expiry of a deca de and a half since the appointments the Court interferes with the same and ther eafter decides to operate the select list of 12.10.95, the turn of the petitione r will not come in the normal course in view of her position in the merit list a t serial No.47. The petitioner, therefore, will not be entitled to any relief at the hands of the Court on the basis of the grievances expressed. The prayers in the original writ petition, therefore, shall stand refused. We have also noticed that by our previous order dated 16.3.2009 salary of the 14 persons whose appointments were found to be, prima facie, illegal have been dir ected to be held back by the Court. By a subsequent order dated 08.6.2009 the wr it petition, insofar as the respondent No.18 is concerned, was dismissed thereby bringing the number of persons whose salary has been withheld to 13. Nearly a y ear has elapsed. The Court, because of the circumstances mentioned above, is un able to take a final decision in the matter. It is not known as to when such fin al decision will be forthcoming. In such event the Court is of the view that fur ther withholding of salary of the 13 appointees will not be justified. We, there fore, vacate the part of the order dated 16.3.2009 directing stoppage of salarie s to the 13 persons and direct the State to forthwith release arrear and current salary to the aforesaid persons. Office to list the case after six weeks. Copy of this order be furnished to Sri S. Shyam, learned Amicus Curiae; Sri V. M . Thomas, learned Standing Counsel, Education and Sri R. Adhikari, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam.