Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 162 (GAU)

Mamani Saikia v. State of Assam

2007-02-27

AMITAVA ROY

body2007
JUDGMENT Amitava Roy, J. 1. The petitioner's grievance pertains to the perceived inaction of the respondent authorities in promoting her in a Grade III post in the establishment of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagaon or in upgrading her thereto. 2. While issuing notice of motion, this Court on 19.10.2001 had directed the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nagaon to keep one post of LDA vacant for the petitioner. 3. I have heard Mr. K.K. Mahanta, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. M. Kataky, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Rahman, learned State counsel for the official respondents. 4. The petitioner's account in short is that, her father, a permanent Grade IV employee in the office of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative societies, Nagaon having died in harness a 5.1.1998, she applied for appointment on compassionate ground to a post of LD Assistant in the said office. However, due to non availability of any post in the said grade, she was appointed as a Grade IV employee in the said establishment in October, 1991 with the assurance that as and when a vacancy in the post of LD Assistant would occur, she would be appointed/upgraded thereto. The petitioner accordingly joined the Grade IV post and has been serving as such since then till date. According to her, in the year 1993, one post of LD Assistant fell vacant in the aforementioned office, but the same was filled up by appointing a political sufferer. Thereafter, in between 1995 to 1997, though six posts of LD Assistants had occurred in the said establishment and the petitioner had staked her claim for appointment thereto, she was overlooked. She has contended that at present as well, there are adequate number of vacancies in the post of LD Assistants in the office of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Nagaon and elsewhere. She has maintained that she is the senior-most Grade IV employee in the above establishment and is academically qualified to be appointed/promoted to the post of LD Assistant and that therefore, the respondent authorities are bound in law to consider her case therefore. 5. She has maintained that she is the senior-most Grade IV employee in the above establishment and is academically qualified to be appointed/promoted to the post of LD Assistant and that therefore, the respondent authorities are bound in law to consider her case therefore. 5. The respondents in their counter, while admitting the induction of the petitioner as a Grade TV employee in the office of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Nagaon, has pleaded that she could not be considered for promotion to the post of LD Assistant as at the relevant time she was not eligible. It has been contended that there is no vacancy in the Grade III post at present in the department to accommodate her on compassionate ground. 6. Mr. Mahanta has argued that having regard to the fact that the petitioner has passed the HSSLC examination and has put in more than 15 years of active service as Grade IV employee in the department, she, in terms of the Assam Directorate Establishment (Ministerial) Service Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') is entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of LD Assistant as comprehended under Rule 10 thereof. The learned Senior counsel has reiterated the availability of vacancies in Grade III posts in the department. 7. Mr. Rahman, learned State counsel, in reply, has argued that the petitioner if is not insisting for compassionate appointment to a Grade III post and satisfies the conditions of eligibility for promotion to the post of LDA under the Rules, there is no reason as to why her case would not be considered in case of availability of vacancies therein. In reply, Mr. Mahanta has submitted that in view of the time lag in between, the petitioner's claim for consideration of her case in terms of the Rules for regular appointment only need to be attended. 8. In reply, Mr. Mahanta has submitted that in view of the time lag in between, the petitioner's claim for consideration of her case in terms of the Rules for regular appointment only need to be attended. 8. As per Rule 10 of the Rules, appointment to the post of LD Assistants has to be made by three modes: (1) by direct recruitment; (2) by selection strictly on the basis of merit from amongst the typists of the service who are matriculates or passed equivalent examination and have rendered not less than 4 years of service on the first day of the year in which the selection is made; (3) by selection on the basis of suitability from amongst the Grade IV staff of the office who passed (i) the higher secondary or equivalent examination and have rendered not less than 5 years service, or (iii) have passed the matriculation or equivalent examination and have rendered not less than 7 years of continuous service in the office of the 1st day of the year in which the selection is made. The accompanying note indicate that the proportion of vacancies vis-a-vis the three categories is 70:20:10. 9. The applicability of the Rules to the department, more particularly for filling up the posts of LD Assistants therein is not in dispute before this Court. It is manifest from the aforementioned provision of the Rules that for promotion thereto, a member of the Grade IV staff of the department who conforms to the prescriptions of eligibility thereunder is entitled to be considered against the quota earmarked for the employees of such grade. The unrebutted facts constituting the service profile of the petitioner proclaim that she satisfies the norms of eligibility prescribed by Rule 10. In the above view of the matter, she is entitled in law to be considered for the post of LD Assistant in terms thereof. Her grievance for having been long overlooked in the above premise therefore, has substance. However, in view of the lapse of time, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the promotions to the said posts already made. 10. Her grievance for having been long overlooked in the above premise therefore, has substance. However, in view of the lapse of time, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the promotions to the said posts already made. 10. In the attending facts and circumstances, therefore, this Court is of the view that it would meet the ends of justice if this petition is closed with a direction to the Respondent authorities, more particularly the respondent No. 2, Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam to cause appropriate steps to be taken to have the case of the petitioner's considered for promotion to the post of LD Assistant on regular basis in terms of the aforementioned Rules as and when it is decided to fill up the vacancies in the department. Ordered accordingly. No costs.