SHILLONG:
The Meghalaya High Court has stayed recruitment processes for all posts in the state until the roster system is put in place.
Hearing a writ petition, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W Diengdoh said that the absence of any roster system leaves open possibilities of nepotism and arbitrariness and worse forms of subversion.
The court also said that rosters are to be prepared in respect of all posts whereupon, after applying the reservation policy, future recruitment can be conducted by adhering to the ratio of reservation.
“This will apply across state government agencies and instrumentalities in the state wherever the reservation policy is in vogue,” the bench said. The court said that it is alarming that despite 50 years of the formation of the state and 50 years of reservation in state government jobs, there is no roster system yet.
“Indeed, this Bench was constrained to raise a question in the course of a recent matter as to how the reservation policy could be implemented without a roster,” it said.
The court also stated that it is surprising that there are bureaucrats in place and there have been bureaucrats for the last 50 years and it did not dawn on any one of them to ensure that the roster system was put in place before the reservation policy could be appropriately implemented.
“Upon inquiry, it is discovered that it is the same distressing feature in the matter of recruitment in this High Court over the last decade of its existence. Learned Advocate for the State admits that there are no lists pertaining to posts for any assessment of
what category of candidates ought to be next recruited,” the court said.
The Advocate General acknowledged that reservation cannot be implemented without a roster.
It may be mentioned that the court passed the order while hearing a writ petition filed by employees of the Social Welfare Department who had complained about the preparation of the gradation list in terms of Rule 15 of the Meghalaya Social Welfare Service Rules, 2007.
As far as recruitment in the Social Welfare Department is concerned, the High Court said that in the recruitment process initiated in 2006 and completed in 2009, even the advertisement did not indicate how many posts were for reserved candidates and how
many for others.
“There does not appear to be any list of employees in each post relevant for the purpose of reservation,” the Bench said.