The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of judicial intervention in policy decisions and the use of an equitable principle to determine seniority.

Rajan Gogoi, J.

1. A decision to merge the post of Assistant Superintendent (Stores) with the post of Office Superintendent, to give the merged post the nomenclature of Superintendent and the consequential fixation of seniority of the Respondent No. 5 in the cadre of Superintendent above the writ Petitioner is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. To appreciate the challenge made, a brief recital of the core facts will be necessary .

2. The Petitioner was initially appointed as an Upper Division Clerk in the North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology, hereinafter referred to as the NERIST, on 17.3.1986. The Respondent No. 5, on the other hand, was directly appointed to the post of Store Keeper on 8.5.1987. On 28.10.1991, the Petitioner was promoted to the next higher post of Assistant. The pay scale of the posts of Assistant and Store Keeper, which would be relevant, may be noticed at this stage. The pay scale of the post of Store Keeper was of Rs. 1400-2300/- (revised to Rs. 4,000-7,000/-) whereas the past of Assistant was in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2600/- (revised to Rs. 5,000-8,000/-). On 1.12.1992, the Respondent No. 5 was promoted to the next higher post of Assistant Superintendent (Stores), which was in the scale of pay of Rs. 1640-2900/-, (revised to Rs. 5,500-9,000). The post of Office Superintendent was in the same scale of pay. The Petitioner was promoted to the said post of Office Superintendent on 12.1.1998.

On the basis of such of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission which were accepted the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 was enacted and by a communication dated 5.6.1998 addressed by the Deputy Secretary, Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resources, Government of India, the Director of NERIST was informed that the pay scales as incorporated in the Part-A of the first Schedule to the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 is being extended to employees of NERIST. In paragraph 2.1 of the said communication dated 5.6.1998, it was mentioned that as the posts of Assistant Superintendent (Stores) and Office Superintendent were in the same scale of pay, the two posts may be merged and a new nomenclature of Superintendent be given to the post. Acting pursuant to the aforesaid decision of the Government of India, as contained in the communication dated 5.6.1998, the Board of Management of NERIST in its 42nd meeting held on 8.6.1998, considered the matter and took a decision for merger of the two posts in question. Thereafter, an Office Order dated 17.6.1998 was issued indicating the revised pay scales of different posts in the NERIST. In the said order dated 17.6.1998, it was reflected that the post of Assistant Superintendent (Stores) is being merged with the Office Superintendent.

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid merger effected, a provisional seniority list of Superintendents was circulated by Office Memo dated 4.3.2002. In the said provisional list, the Respondent No. 5 was shown to be senior to the Petitioner. The seniority assigned, as can be understood from the remarks noted in the provisional seniority list, was on the basis of the earlier date of joining of the Respondent No. 5 in the scale of pay of Rs. 1640-2900 (revised to Rs. 5500-9,000/-) in the post of Assistant Superintendent (Stores), which was also the scale of pay of the post of Office Superintendent held by the Petitioner at the time of the merger of the two posts.

The Petitioner by his representation dated 3.4.2002 sought a rectification of the seniority assigned. However, by O.M. dated 4.7.2002, the final seniority list of Superintendent was circulated reiterating the seniority of the incumbents as reflected in the provisional seniority list dated 4.3.2002. Thereafter, it appears that the Petitioner kept on protesting against the seniority assigned. A committee was, therefore, constituted by the authority of the NERIST to go into the matter. In the report of the aforesaid co