Judgment · High Court · 2012

Heard Mrs. J.M. Konwar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sai kia, learned AAG, Assam along with Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Finan ce. I have also heard Mr. S.P. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Directorate of Emp loyment and Craftsmen Training. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to release his salary stated to be withheld from 23.2.2011, on whic h date he had joined the post of Junior Assistant in the office of the responden t No.5 i.e. the Director of Accounts and Treasuries. As stated in the writ petit ion, the petitioner had responded to the employment notice dated 7.3.2007 publis hed in pursuance to the Govt. letter dated 23.11.2006 for the post of Junior Ass istant in the offices of the Heads of Departments of Assam. In due course, a sel ection was conducted and the select list was published on 25/2/2009 enlisting 27 2 successful candidates including the petitioner. His name appears at Sl. No.2 i n the merit list of SC category candidates. After the aforesaid publication of the select list, the Director of Employment a nd Craftsmen Training, by his order dated 20.2.2009 forwarded the list of recomm ended candidates to various heads of department for appointment. Initially 142 c andidates had been appointed. Remaining 130 candidates were not allowed to join although they had reported for duties. Being aggrieved, they had filed a writ pe tition being WP(C) No. 4894/2009. In the mean time, a meeting was held on 23.12. 2010 under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Assam, in which a d ecision was taken to appoint all the candidates who had been selected. The depar tments were asked to keep the process of selection and appointment of the candid ates in abeyance till the selected candidates were appointed. The petitioner has also referred to the Annexure-3 letter dated 28.1.2011 addres sed to the learned State Counsel by the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assa m in the Personnel (B) Department, by which it was conveyed that all the Directo rates had been instructed to appoint the candidates sponsored by the Director of Employment and Craftsmen Training against the vacant posts of Junior Assistant. By the said letter, the information furnished was directed to be produced befor e the Court. The aforesaid writ petition along with other writ petitions were disposed of by order dated 0.2.2011 taking note of the aforesaid letter and recording that sinc e the State Govt. decided to appoint all the candidates including the petitioner s, which included the present petitioner as well, nothing further would survive in the writ petition. After the aforesaid development, the petitioner was appointed by Annexure-5 orde r dated 25.2.2011 issued by the Director of Accounts and Treasuries and accordin gly he joined the post and has been service as such, however, without any salary . The respondent No.1 i.e. the Govt. of Assam in the Finance Department has filed an affidavit in which it has been stated that out of the 3 Junior Assistants app ointed by the Director of Accounts and Treasuries, the validity of SIU approval of two posts had expired and in respect of the third post being held by the peti tioner, there was no SIU approval. Accordingly, the Director of Accounts and Tre asuries, Assam has moved the Finance Department for necessary extension of valid ity of the said two posts and SIU approval of the remaining posts i.e. the third post being held by the petitioner. It has been stated that in response to the s aid recommendation of the Director of Accounts and Treasuries, the Finance Depar tment extended the validity of the SIU approval of the two posts. However, clari fication was sought for as to why the petitioner was appointed without the SIU a pproval. It was also contended that the selection as per valid service rules was not conducted for selection of Junior Assistant by the Directorate of Employmen t and Craftsmen Training. The basic plea of the Finance Department is that since the SIU approval for appo intment of the petitioner was not obtained, the petitioner could not have been a ppointed by the Director of Accounts and Treasuries and consequently his salary can also not be released. Mr. S.P. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Directorate of Employment and Craftsmen Training has produced the copy of the letter dated 29. 7.2010 addressed to all Administrative Departments and Heads of the departments by the Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Personnel(B) Department , by which the fact of selecting 272 candidates for appointment as Junior Assist ant was conveyed. By the said letter, it was further intimated that the Govt. ha d approved the proposal for appointment of the remaining 114 candidates (after a ppointing 158 candidates out of 272 candidates) against available vacancies in t he offices of various Heads of Departments. It is an admitted fact that after the appointment of the petitioner by order dat ed 23.2.2011, he has been continuing in his services, without however, any salar y. He was party to the earlier round of litigation referred to above. By order d ated 10.2.2011, the earlier writ petitions were disposed of taking note of the a pproval conveyed by the State Govt. towards appointment of the Junior Assistants who had been selected for appointment. The said order having attained finality, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner having joined the post of Ju nior Assistant, he is entitled to receive his monthly salary. This curt is bound by the said decision of this Court and cannot sit on appeal over the said decis ion. In the counter affidavit filed by the Finance Department and as noted above , it has been contended that the SIU approval was not obtained in respect of the post being held by the petitioner. If there was any lapse on the part of the He ad of Department in which the petitioner has been appointed, the petitioner hims elf cannot be made responsible for the same. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the admissible salary to the petitioner and if in the process any fu rther exercise is required to be carried out in granting ex-post-facto approval etc, the same shall be carried out as expeditiously as possible but at any rate not later then one month from today. There shall be no order as to costs.