P. K. Musahary, J.-

Heard Mr. Kekriengulle, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard also Ms. Y. longkumar learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate and Mr. C. T. Jamir, learned Se­nior Advocate assisted by Mr. Wati Jamir, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 3 to 7.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Sr. Lec­turer on contract basis for a period of 1 (one) year vide an order dated 30.03.1993 which was extended from time to time till her con­tract service was regularised by an order dated 15.06.2005 pursuant to Memoranda dated 18.02.2004 and 12.05.2004. But regularization was made effective from 16.01.2004. By an order dated 16.11.2006, the Government decided to grant past con­tract service benefits to those employees regularised in accordance with the aforesaid Memoranda dated 18.02.2004 and 12.05.2004 in the ratio of 3:1. The said ben­efit as denied to the petitioner.

The petitioner alleged that contract ser­vices of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 as Lectur­ers was regularized by an order dated 28.03.2001. The respondent Nos. 3, 6and 7, who were on deputation, were absorbed by an order dated 28.03.2001, with retro­spective effect from 15.01.2001. By an or­der dated 20.09.2002, the respondent No. 3, was given officiating promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer with retrospective effect from 20.01.2001. By another order dated 02.09.2002, the respondent No.2, who was appointed on deputation to the post of Sr. Lecturer, was absorbed with retrospective effect from 08.04.97. The respondent Nos. 6 and 7 were also given officiating promo­tions to the post of Senior Lecturer with ret­rospective effect from 20.01.2001. By and order dated 20.11.2003 similarly, the respon­dent Nos. 4 and 5 were given officiating pro­motion by an order dated 20.11.2003 with retrospective effect 14.11.2003. However, the promotion of private respondents to the post of Lecturer was made subject to regularization by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short 'DPC') and till date, except respondent No. 3, officiating promo­tion of other respondents, is yet to be regu­larized. The officiating promotion of respon­dent No.3 to the post of Sr. Lecturer stood regularized with retrospective effect from 20.01.2001 issued under notification dated 10.03.2005.

3. A tenative Seniority list o f the officers of SCERT/D1ET was published on 01.08.2006, in which the petitioner was placed below the respondents in the grade of Sr. Lecturer, despite the fact that the pri­vate respondents are still on officiating pro­motion.

4. Against the aforesaid tentative Senior­ity list, the petitioner submitted representa­tion but without considering the grievances of the petitioner, the final select list was prepared by an O.M. dated 17.31.06 placing the peti­tioner below private respondents, thereby the respondent Nos. 3 and 6 were again given further officiating promotion to the post of Principal, DIET, without considering the petitioner's case, through she is Senior to the said respondent Nos. 3 and 6 in rank as Sr. Lecturer. In the aforesaid background of the case, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing and setting aside the following orders :-

(a) Order dated 20.09.2002 granting initiating promotion to the private respon­dents to the post of Sr. Lecturers with ret­rospective effect from 20.01.2001;

(b) Order dated 10.03.2005 regular­izing the services of Respondent No. 3 with retrospective effect from 20.01,2001;

(c) Order dated 20.11.03 giving ret­rospective officiating promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer w.e.f. 20.01.2001 in re­spect of respeondent Nos. 6 and 7;

(d) Officiating promotion order dated 22.01.07 in respect of respondent Nos. 3 and 6 to the post of Principal, DIET;

(e) Final seniority list dated 17.11.2006 as on 01.07.2006 and re-adjustment in the final seniority list and for consideration of petitioner's promotion to the post of Prin­cipal, DIET and;

(f) the benefits of past contract service pursuant to the order dated 16.11.2006.

5. As against the afor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document