High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 1771/2012 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN Heard Mr. R.M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, l earned Standing Counsel, Health Department appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. None appears for respondent No. 5. By way of this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indi a, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 16.3.2012 issued by Director of Heal th Services (FW), Assam (respondent No. 2) promoting respondent No. 5 to the pos t of District Extension and Media Officer. Petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondents to promote him to the said post of District Extension and Med ia Officer. Case of the petitioner is that he joined service in the Health Departmen t, Government of Assam as Block Extension Educator on 22.6.1979. In the course o f his service, petitioner was promoted to the post of Deputy Extension and Media Officer on 28.11.2008 and posted at Nalbari. Pursuant thereto, he joined on 1.1 2.2008. Post of Deputy Extension and Media Officer is the feeder cadre for the p ost of District Extension and Media Officer. In the absence of service rule, the post of District Extension and Media Officer is filled up by promotion from the cadre of Deputy Extension and Media Officer by following the principle of senio rity. Petitioner is the senior most Deputy Extension and Media Officer. Though the petitioner joined the promoted post of Deputy Extension and M edia Officer on 1.12.2008, the departmental authorities had wrongly recorded his date of joining as 9.8.2009. When it was brought to the notice of the authority , the Additional Chief Medical and Health Officer (FW), Kamrup vide letter dated 30.1.2012, wrote to the respondent No. 2 informing the latter that the joining date of the petitioner was 1.12.2008 and not 9.8.2009. Petitioner had submitted representation seeking consideration of his cas e for promotion to the post of District Extension and Media Officer, being the s enior most in the feeder cadre. But without considering the case of the petition er, respondent No. 5, who was junior to the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Ex tension and Media Officer, was promoted to the post of District Extension and Me dia Officer by the impugned order dated 16.3.2012 issued by respondent No 2. Aggrieved, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking th e relief as indicated above. Contention of the petitioner is that he the senior most in the feeder ca dre. Because of wrong recording of his date of joining in the feeder cadre, the authority erroneously treated him junior to respondent No. 5 and following the p rinciple of seniority, promoted respondent No. 5 to the post of District Extensi on and Media Officer vide the impugned order. Respondent No. 2 has filed affidavit. Stand taken is that meeting of the Selection Board to consider promotion to the post of District Extension and Med ia Officer was held on 15.12.2011. The state level seniority list in the rank of Deputy Extension and Media Officer was placed before the Selection Board. Petit ioner’s seniority was counted from the date of his joining in the feeder post, w hich at that point of time was recorded as 9.8.2009. Respondent No. 5’s date of joining in the said post was recorded as 6.3.2009. In such circumstances, respon dent No. 5 was treated as senior to the petitioner and accordingly was recommend ed for promotion. It is further stated that the Selection Board considered promo tion to four vacant posts in the rank of District Extension and Media Officer. T he Selection Board selected the following persons for promotion to the post of D istrict Extension and Media Officer against the existing vacancies. Bhogeswar Borah - District F.W. Bureau, Nagaon Gohin Ch Kalita - District F.W. Bureau, Darrang Dinabandhu Kalita - District F.W. Bureau, Darrang (2) (3) (1) (4) Hemen Ch Baruah - District F.W. Bureau, Kamrup (Petitioner) Promotion of petitioner was delayed because of late submission of his AC Rs for the last three years. It is submitted that after receipt of the ACRs, pet itioner was promoted to the post of District Extension and Media Officer and pos ted at Karimganj vide order dated 3.4.2012 passed by the respondent No. 2.
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the autho rity had erroneously recorded the date of joining of the petitioner in the feede r cadre as 9.8.2009 instead of 1.12.2008, which was subsequently rectified vide communication dated 30.1.2012. That being the position, petitioner is admittedly senior to respondent No. 5 and therefore, his promotion to the post of District Extension and Media Officer ought to have been given effect to from a date prio r to the date of promotion of respondent No. 5. Mr. B.Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel fairly submits that after the erro r was detected, the authority promptly took necessary steps and promoted the pet itioner immediately thereafter by issuing order dated 3.4.2012. He, however, sub mits that respondent No. 5 and the other two persons were promoted to the post o f District Extension and Media officer on the same day i.e., 16.3.2012 and, ther efore, question of effecting promotion of petitioner prior to the said date does not arise. As already noticed, respondent No. 5 has not appeared and contested the present proceeding.
Decision
Submissions made have been considered. In view of the stand taken by the respondent No. 2 in his affidavit as w ell as the submission made today by the learned Standing Counsel, the controvers y raised in the writ petition has narrowed down to a very short compass. It is n ot disputed by the respondents that the petitioner had joined the feeder cadre o n promotion on 1.12.2008, which has been acknowledged by letter dated 30.1.2012 of the Additional Chief Medical and Health Officer (FW), Kamrup addressed to the respondent No. 2. If the date of petitioner’s entry into the feeder cadre is ta ken as 1.12.2008, he stands above respondent No. 5 in seniority as respondent No . 5 had joined on 6.3.2009. It is also not disputed that promotion is made on th e basis of seniority though the merit is also ascertained by considering the las t three years ACRs. Petitioner’s ACRs for the last three years were considered a nd on being satisfied, he was promoted by order dated 3.4.2012. As admittedly, p etitioner is senior to respondent No. 5, his promotion to the post of District E xtension and Media Officer would have to be given effect to from the date of pro motion of respondent No. 5 i.e. w.e.f. 16.3.2012 by maintaining his seniority. Respondent No. 2 shall do the needful in this regard by passing appropri ate order within a period of 1(one) month from the date of receipt of a certifie d copy of this order. Writ petition stands allowed.