In a recent verdict, the Meghalaya High Court affirmed the validity of appointments made after a thorough selection procedure, emphasizing that once the selection process concludes, no changes can be made.

Justice H.S. Thangkhiew, who was overseeing the case, ruled that cancelling the recruitment process after its completion, especially without granting the recruits a chance to be heard, violated the Principles of Natural Justice.

The court instructed the respondents, the North East Centre for Technology Application and Reach (NECTAR), to review the petitioners' appointments for regularization, in accordance with the regulations set forth in NECTAR's Service Bye Laws.

The ruling follows a chain of writ petitions concerning appointments stemming from an advertisement released by NECTAR on July 10, 2021.

Rakesh Kumar Sarmah, Simanta Das, Simon Phukan, and Ankit Shrivastava, the petitioners, had applied for different positions advertised by NECTAR and successfully navigated through the screening and selection procedures conducted by the relevant authorities. Subsequently, they were issued official offer letters and began their respective roles.

However, their employment was abruptly terminated by an order issued on October 7, 2022, which declared their appointments null and void.

The petitioners contended that the respondents couldn't reverse their decision after granting approval for the appointments and completing the entire selection process. They emphasized that such actions were arbitrary and constituted discriminatory treatment.

The defense, however, opposed the petitioners' argument, citing that the appointments departed from recruitment regulations as they were made via direct recruitment instead of deputation. They also highlighted procedural irregularities and the absence of the Governing Council Chairman during a critical meeting as reasons for annulling the recruitment process.

After thorough consideration, the court concluded that the appointments were conducted in compliance with the sanctioned recruitment regulations and protocols. It underscored the endorsement of approval by the Governing Council and underscored the lack of any irregularities justifying the annulment of appointments. Additionally, the court asserted that "the absence of the Chairman, therefore, cannot serve as a basis to invalidate the recruitment process."

As a result, the High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, overturning and nullifying the order that revoked their appointments.

Cause Title: Rakesh Kumar Sarmah and Others v NECTAR