The main legal point established is that the petitioner was entitled to have his ACRs treated as 'Outstanding' and 'Very Good' for the relevant periods, and the court directed a review DPC for his retrospective promotion.

Heard Mr. J. Roy, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. Y. Doloi, the learned Additional Advocate General for all the respondents. As the petitioner is the same in both the writ petitions and the issues also similar, they are both taken up together for disposal.

2. The case has a checkered history and therefore, narration of the brief facts of the case would be necessary at the outset.

3. The petitioner joined the State Public Works Department (PWD) as Assistant Engineer in the year 1983. He was promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in the year 1994 and thereafter as Executive Engineer in the year 2002. Subsequently, in the year 2013, he was promoted as Superintending Engineer (SE) w.e.f 16.02.2007. Having attaining the age of superanuation on 31st March, 2016 he has now retired from service from the post of S.E.

4. The controversy started in the year 2006-2007 when the petitioner and other similarly situated Executive Engineers on being deprived of their due promotions approached this Court by filing WP(C) Nos. 4932, 4933, 4934 and 4935/2006 besides WP(C) Nos. 246/2007 challenging the selection process that was held on 28.07.2006 for promotion to the post of SE from the post of Executive Engineer. The writ petitions were disposed of vide a common Judgment and order dated 14.12.2007 directing the respondents authorities to reassess the suitability of the petitioner as per the observation made therein.

5. Against the common Judgment and order dated 14.12.2007, the respondent authorities and the private respondents therein filed writ appeals before the Division Bench of this Court. Leaving aside the writ appeals filed by the State as well as the private respondents against the relief given to the petitioner in particular, the Division Bench was pleased to dismiss the other writ appeals. On further appeal before the Apex Court through SLP No. 20024/2008, the SLP was only dismissed vide order dated 25.08.2008. The writ appeals against the petitioner were then finally heard by the Division Bench and vide Judgment dated 24.06.2010, the same were dismissed and the respondents were directed to comply with the Judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 14.12.2007.

6. Despite the direction and a number of representations submitted by the petitioner, the respondents failed to comply with the direction as such the petitioner was compelled to file Contempt Case (C) No. 259/2011 alleging disobedience of Court’s direction. As a result the petitioner was temporarily promoted and allowed to officiate as SE, Kokrajhar Building Circle w.e.f taking charge which was subsequently made effective from 16.02.2007 vide notification dated 28.01.2013 and thereafter again modified to 12.02.2007.

7. The case of the petitioner is that although he was promoted retrospectively to the post of SE but similarly situated officers including his juniors were promoted as Additional Chief Engineer (Addl. C.E) and therefore according to him, he is entitled to be promoted as Addl. C.E w.e.f 21.01.2011. His representation dated 11.03.2013 amongst others having not been considered, the petitioner is again before this Court through the instant two writ petitions.

8. It is the case of the petitioner that he got his legitimate promotion to the rank of SE retrospectively after many years and likewise, he seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider his promotion to the post of Additional C.E. with retrospective effect from 21.01.2011 vide WP (C) No. 1843/2013. In his writ petition, he further prays that as one Shri. Budheswar Bora holding the post of Additional C.E, Dibrugarh, Eastern Zone, PWD (Roads) was due for superannuation on 01.04.2013 and therefore, he maybe allowed to hold the charge of Additional C.E on the superannuation of the officer mentioned.

9. In WP(C) No. 1567/2015, the petitioner has challe