Back
2012 Supreme(Gau) 419
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Iqbal Ahmed Ansari and Arun Chandra Upadhyay, JJ.
Mr. Kirba Lomi & Anr. – Appellants
Vs.
State of A.P. &Ors. – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 427 (AP) of 2008
Decided On: 30.03.2012
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Mr. R.P. Sarmah, Mr. K. Jini, Mr. N. Nyorak, Mr. D. Kamduk and Ms. M. Jonnom
For Respondents/Defendant: Dr. A.K. Saraf, A.G., Mr. R.H. Nabam, Sr. G.A. and Ms. G. Deka, G.A.
Headnote:
Arunachal Pradesh Senior Analyst (Group A) Recruitment Rules, 1990 - Repeal Rules, 2008 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 166(3) - Posts of Senior Research Assistant - Recruitment to a service or post - Conditions of service - Whether the Rules of Executive Business - Petitioner No. 1 herein was initially appointed on as Upper Division Clerk in Civil Secretariat, Arunachal Pradesh. Similarly, petitioner No. 2 was also initially appointed as UDC in said Secretariat - Petitioner and petitioner No. 2 were promoted to the post of Assistants in year respectively While working as Assistants the petitioners on being detailed by Department concerned underwent Basic Management Service course for a period of three months at Institute of Training and Management New Delhi and successfully completed same - On completion of training petitioners resumed their duties as Assistants - Held, In consequence of what have been indicated above officiating promotions which were being enjoyed by present petitioners, were wholly illegal and could not have been allowed to stand good on record -State respondents therefore committed no error of law in taking corrective steps in manner as they have done and in cancelling officiating promotions, which the petitioners had been enjoying - Decision of Government to repeal 2007 Rules framing of 2008 Rules and consequential decision of setting right things by taking away the illegal promotions though officiating in nature earlier accorded to petitioners are not, in any way illegal and do not therefore suffer from any infirmity legal or factual - Petition dismissed
I.A. Ansari, J.
1. (i) Do the rules for transaction of business, framed under Article 166(3) of the Constitution of India, need to be followed and/if not followed, whether a decision would be illegal?
(ii) Whether the Rules of Executive Business, framed under Article 166(3), in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, permit any change in the conditions of service, or in the method of recruitment to a service or post, to which the appointment is made by the Governor, and if such change or alteration is in violation of the Rules of Executive Business, whether such change or alteration is sustainable in law?
Broadly speaking, these are the two important questions of paramount importance, which the present writ petition has raised.
The material facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, may, in brief, be set out as under:
(i) The petitioner No. 1 herein was initially appointed, on 14.11.1984, as Upper Division Clerk (in short, 'UDC') in the Civil Secretariat, Arunachal Pradesh. Similarly, petitioner No. 2 was also initially appointed, on 21.08.1990, as UDC in the said Secretariat. The petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 were promoted to the post of Assistants in the year 1992 and 1996 respectively While working as Assistants, the petitioners, on being detailed by the Department concerned, underwent Basic Management Service (in short, 'BMS') course for a period of three months at the Institute of Training and Management, New Delhi, and successfully completed the same. On completion of the training, the petitioners resumed their duties as Assistants. This was followed by promotion of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 to the posts of Senior Research Assistant, on 04.01.2000 and 05.01.2000, respectively, in the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Training, Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
(ii) By a notification, dated 20.07.2000, the post of Senior Research Assistant was re-designated as Junior Analyst, in the Department of Administrative Reforms, and this was followed by another notification, dated 05.02.2001, whereby recruitment rules for Junior Analyst, namely, "The Recruitment Rules for the post(s) of Junior Analyst, 2001 (in short, the 2001 Recruitment Rules') were notified by the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Training, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. As far as the Senior Analysts were concerned, the recruitment rules for Senior Analyst, namely, "The Arunachal Pradesh Senior Analyst (Group 'A') Recruitment Rules, 1990 (in short, the 1990 Recruitment Rules')", were published by the Department of Administrative Reforms, on 16.02.1990, under the seal and signature of the Chief Secretary, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. By relaxing the conditions for recruitment to the post of Senior Analyst in the 1990 Recruitment Rules, petitioner No. 1 was promoted to the post of Senior Analyst in the said Department. By yet another notification, dated 23.06.2006, the "the Post of Senior Analyst, General Arunachal Service Group 'A' (Gazetted) Non Ministerial Recruitment (2nd Amendment) Rules, 2006 (in short, 'the 2nd Amendment Rules') were published, whereby the post of Senior Analyst was re-designated as Senior Analyst-cum-Under Secretary to the Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
(iii) A proposal was initiated, in the year 2006 itself, for creation of the post of Deputy Secretary and Personal Assistant in the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Training, in order to strengthen the department. The proposal for creation of the post of Deputy Secretary, in the said department, was cleared by the State Cabinet, on 15.07.2007, and, thus, a post of post of Deputy Secretary, in the Department Administrative Reforms and Training, came into existence on the basis of the order, dated 22.08.2007, issued, by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Arunachal Pradesh. As far as the recruitment rules for Deputy Secretary, Administrative Reforms Department were concerned, the Governor of Arunachal Pradesh publish
