Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040000272025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/4/2025 Smti Neelam Mesap and 6 Ors Daughter of Shri Neelam Richo, resident of Dem Village, PO Deed, PS Yachuli, Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Smti Elimi Tayeng Age: Occupation : Daughter of Okep Tayeng resident of Chimpu PO RK Mission PS Chimpu Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Likha Tamar Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Likha Tegi office of Superintendent Fire and Emergency Services Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Toko Totum Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Toko Tegi C/o Nich Meji O/o Arunachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board Paryavaran Bhawan Papu Hill PO Naharlagun and PS Papu Hill Page No.# 2/5 Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Smti Toku Piku Age: Occupation : Daughter of Late Toku Tariam resident of Yaglung village PO and PS Palin Kra Daadi District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: Miss Hura Yania Age: Occupation : Daughter of Shri Huro Allo resident of Itanagar Near Tarang Academy PO RK Mission and PS Chimpu Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Miss Charu Taja Age: Occupation : Daughter of Charu Tago resident of Tirpu Village PO Chambang PS Palin Kra Daadi District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP and 3 Ors through the Commissioner, Department of Education, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:The Secretary Age: 0 Occupation : Department of Education Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 3:The Director of Secondary Education Age: 0 Occupation : Department of Education Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Page No.# 3/5 Itanagar. 4:The Special Investigation Team Age: 0 Occupation : through the Superintendent of Police Crime Branch Police Head Quarters Chimpu Itanagar Advocate for the Petitioner : Gallen Taloh, Advocate for the Respondent : Taba Tagum, Spl.PP (SIT),J Tsering BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 27.02.2025 Heard Mr. G. Taloh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T. Tagum, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department. 2. By way of instituting the present proceedings, the petitioners have raised a grievance with regard to the action/inaction on the part of the respondents in not taking to its logical conclusion, the process of recruitment as initiated in pursuance of the Advertisement dated 12.06.2020, for the post of Post Graduate Teacher(PGT)/Trained Graduate Teacher(TGT) under the Meritorious Sports Persons (MSP) Quota reserved for the Arunachal Pradesh Scheduled Tribe (APST) candidates in the Department of Education, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. 3. The petitioners participated in the selection process. Subsequently, a select list was prepared. It is claimed by the petitioners that their names found place in the said select list including in the waiting list. At that stage, an FIR Page No.# 4/5 dated 25.06.2021 was lodged by the President of Arunachal Taekwondo Association, alleging before the Officer-in-Charge of Special Investigation Team (SIT) that some persons who were not players of Taekwondo were using fake/forged medal/ participant certificates without his knowledge for being recruited under the Meritorious Sports Persons(MSP) Quota in various Departments of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh. Accordingly, Crime Branch P.S. Case No.07/2021 was registered. 4. After completion of the investigation, first charge-sheet was filed on 17.03.2022, wherein the petitioners herein, were not arrayed as accused. Subsequently, supplementary charge-sheet was filed on 28.03.2024, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused. Thereafter, the petitioners approached this Court by filing criminal petitions, being Crl. Ptn. No.110/2024 and Crl.Ptn. No.126/2024, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of such charges. This Court under its order dated 04.09.2024 quashed the charge-sheet insofar as the same relates to the petitioners. 5. In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the authorities should now proceed with the selection process and bring it to a logical conclusion. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in a similar circumstances, relating to the appointment of Junior Engineer(Electrical) under Power Department and under Meritorious Sports Persons (MSP) Quota, this Court had issued certain directions in WP(C)227(AP)2022 under its judgment and order dated 12.03.2024. Therefore, the case of the petitioners can be disposed of in terms of the directions issued at paragraph-10 of the aforesaid judgment. Page No.# 5/5 6. Mr. Tagum, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department also submits that this writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the determination made in paragraph-10 of the judgment and order dated 12.03.2024, passed in WP(C)227(AP)2022. 7. In view of the aforesaid consensus, and also taking note of the similar facts and circumstances as well as the fact that the FIR and charge-sheet in the present case, as well as in WP(C)227(AP)2022, arises out of the same Police Station Case i.e., Crime Branch P.S. Case No.07/2021, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the determination made in paragraph-10 of the judgment and order passed in WP(C)227(AP)2022. 8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant