Serial No. 02 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG MC(WPC) No.141 of 2025 in WP(C) No.265 of 2025 Date of Order: 24.06.2025 Shri. Raziul Islam Son of Shri. Kholilur Rahman, Resident of Village- Bhaitbari, P.O- Bhaitbari, P.S- Phulbari, West Garo Hills District, Meghalaya. ……Petitioner -VERSUS- 1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Sericulture and weaving Department, Meghalaya Shillong. 2. The Director of Sericulture and Weaving Department Meghalaya Shillong. 3. The Deputy Commissioner & Chairman, District Selection Committee, West Jaintia Hills, Jowai. ….. Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.K. Hassan, Adv For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Sen, GA (ORAL) Heard Mr. S.K. Hassan, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and also Mr. S. Sen, learned GA appearing for the respondents. By this application, the applicant has sought for stay of the impugned notice No.DSC.4/2013/2014-17/93 dated 10.06.2025 by which the names of the successful candidates for the post of Sericulture Demonstrator were recommended in order of merit by the District Selection Committee (DSC), 2025:MLHC:532 Jowai. The learned counsel for the applicant contends that the entire selection was conducted without following the norms of selection as laid down in the office memorandum No. PER(AR) 49/2012/5 dated 17.11.2014 inasmuch as no cut-off mark was set by the DSC for the written examination. He submits that there is no disclosure of marks obtained by each of the candidates in the merit list and hence, the same has been prepared arbitrarily. Mr. S. Sen, learned GA appearing for the State on the other hand contends that the applicant himself was not eligible to be a candidate in the selection process in view of the disclosure made in the writ petition showing his age as 38 years. He further contends that apparently there is nothing illegal or improper in the selection made by the DSC. Upon hearing the parties and on perusal of materials on record, it appears that though the applicant has made a prayer for stay of the notice dated 10.06.2025, none of the candidates named therein have been made a party in the main writ petition. Since, passing of interim order of any kind may affect the right of the selected candidates, it would be inappropriate for this Court to pass any order in their absence in the matter. Furthermore, there is nothing in the office memorandum No. PER(AR) 49/2012/5 dated 17.11.2014 which requires disclosure of marks secured by the successful candidates in the merit list. The contention raised on behalf of the applicant, therefore, can be considered only after filing of the response by the respondents in the matter. In view of the above, prayer for interim stay is rejected. This misc. application stands disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 24.06.2025 “Shrity,PS” 2025:MLHC:532 Digitally signed by SHRITY CH MOMIN Date: 2025.06.24 16:32:02 IST