Ashish Subba & Ors. vs State Of Sikkim and Ors.

Satish K. Agnihotri, CJ.

1.Impugning Notice No.152/SPSC/EXAM/2016 dated 17.08.2016, the Petitioners who are stated to be the freshers have come up with this Petition

being WP(C) Bo. 41 of 2016 questioning the legality of the Notice on the ground that the Notice confines to only those candidates who are working as

Junior Engineers (Civil) on temporary employees as ad hoc and contract basis under various Departments of the Government of Sikkim. Subsequently,

an Advertisement No.14/SPSC/2016 dated 29.08.2016 inviting applications from freshers for the posts of Junior Engineers (Civil) was also placed

under challenge. The principal contention of the Petitioners in WP(C) No. 41 of 2016 is that the other freshers who have passed out from the

Universities are denied right to consideration against the existing vacancies.

The Petitioners in WP(C) No. 36 of 2016 are stated to be working as ad hoc Junior Engineers (Civil) after due selection process have filed the

petition questioning the legality of the notice dated 17.08.2016, wherein all the ad hoc/contract employees, irrespective of their period of working, are

treated at par and permitted to make application for appointment on regular basis on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). The contention of Mr. Moulik,

learned Senior Counsel is that the temporary/contract employees appointed recently cannot be treated at par with the petitioners, who have been

working for more than 5 (five) years, thus, it is discriminatory.

During currency of these Petitions, Mr. Karma Thinlay, Senior Government Advocate, producing a copy of the communication dated 24.05.2018,

submits that the State Government has decided to withdraw the impugned Notice No.152/SPSC/EXAM/2016 dated 17.08.2016 as well as

Advertisement No.14/SPSC/2016 dated 29.08.2016.

Thus, nothing survives for adjudication in the matter.

Mr. A. Moulik, Learned Senior Counsel, would further submit that if the Petitioners are not satisfied with the new proposed Notification, the

Petitioners may be granted liberty to approach this Court.

Needless to state that issuance of fresh Notification may create a new cause of action, for that no liberty is required.

On the issue as to whether the instant petitions, on account of withdrawal of the impugned notifications, have become infructuous, all the parties are

in agreement.

In such view of the matter, nothing survives for adjudication.

Thus, WP(C) No. 41 of 2016 (Ms. Sajna Rai & Ors. vs. State of Sikkim & Ors.) and WP(C) No. 36 of 2016 (Ashish Subba & Ors. vs. State of

Sikkim & Ors.) are disposed of.

Communication dated 24.05.2018 is taken on record.