IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Devashis Baruah, J.
Jagat Deka S/o Lt. Haricharan Deka - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) No. 630 of 2021
Decided On : 15-12-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 226 – Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)(Assam) Rules, 1977 – Rule 22 – Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 – Section 14 – Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – Section 12 – Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2010 – Power of High Court to issue certain writs – Offences of companies – Member secratery and officers others employees of state boards – Learned Senior counsel assisted learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of Forest Department learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of Pollution Control Board – Held, Court promotional orders respondent up gradation of respondent violation to Regulation not have requisite qualification said orders are liable to be interfered with – Whether impugned orders respondent promoted to post of Assistant Executive Engineer and as to whether impugned order whereby respondent upgraded to post of Assistant Executive Engineer was required to be interfered – Writ petition is disposed of.
JUDGMENT AND ORDER :
Heard Mr. U. K. Nair, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Singha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. D. Gogoi, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Forest Department. I have also heard Mr. S. Baruah, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Pollution Control Board and its Officials and Mr. S. K. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents except the respondent Nos. 12 and 15.
2. It appears from the records that the respondent No.12 and 15 have been duly served and in spite of that, they have not put their appearance.
3. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the various promotion orders whereby the respondent Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 were promoted to the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer by the orders dated 08.10.2020 and 09.10.2020 as well as the order dated 09.10.2020 whereby the private respondent Nos. 13 to 17 were upgraded to the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer. At the outset, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that he is not challenging the promotion of the respondent No.12 taking into account that the respondent No.12 belongs to the reserved category and has the qualification of B.E.
4. For the purpose of deciding the dispute involved in the instant writ petition, it is relevant to take note of the brief facts of the instant case as would appear from a perusal of pleadings of the parties herein. In the writ petition, it has been mentioned that the petitioner is a Bachelor in Engineering (Chemical) was appointed as the Assistant Engineer in the Pollution Control Board, Assam vide the order dated 31.07.2012 and the petitioner joined on 01.08.2012.
5. From the records, it is apparent that in the Minutes of the meeting of the Pollution Control Board, Assam i.e. the 75th Board Meeting held on 19.06.2001, a resolution was adopted in respect to Item No.8. It is seen from the said Minutes that as per the Central Pollution Control Board, no Diploma Engineer should be recruited and the existing Diploma Engineers should be upgraded from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer aiming at increasing efficiency of the engineering service of the Board in future. The Board agreed to the said policy of the Central Pollution Control Board in principle but taking into account the then existing financial position of the Board, it was resolved to upgrade those posts of Junior Engineers which conform eligibility of norms phase wise. It was also decided that the Board would not fill the existing vacant post of the Assistant Engineers till it decided by the Board otherwise and the Member Secretary of the Board was directed to submit service sheets of the upgraded engineers person wise specifically mentioning the period of qualifying service, scale of pay, basic pay, departmental proceedings, if any, of the junior engineers for final approval of the Board.
6. On the basis of the said minutes of the meeting dated 19.06.2001, the Member Secretary of the Pollution Control Board sought approval from the Government of Assam, Environment and Forest Department seeking upgradation of the posts with the incumbents to the post of Assistant Engineers vide a communication. Pursuant thereto, the Chairman of Pollution Control Board vide an Office Order dated 30.12.2005 in exercise of powers under Rule 22(iii) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)(Assam) Rules, 1977 upgraded the services of 14 Junior Engineers working in the Board having more than 10 years of experience to the post of Assistant Engineer with immediate effect. The private respondents herein except the respondent No.12 were amongst the various persons whose posts were upgraded in terms with the Office Order dated 30.12.2005. It further appears that on 05.12.2009, the Member Secretary of the Pollution Control Board, Assam vide an Office Order had also fixed the pay of the persons
Rama Nand and Others Vs. the Chief Secretary
Dilip Kumar Garg Another Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2009) 4 SCC 753
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. R. Santhakumari Velusamy reported in (2011) 9 SCC 510
Eligible employees' right to timely consideration for promotion is fundamental under Articles 14 & 16; departmental delays in DPC, recruitment rules, and post revival cannot deny it. Directed prompt ....
Amended promotion rules' 45% quota for Junior Engineers with 7 years service contains no Diploma/Degree requirement; unqualified seniors eligible; DPC rejection on qualification grounds invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the requisition for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) was sent in compliance with the statutory rules, and the Rules, 1968 p....
The court ruled that promotions must adhere to established service regulations and competitive merit, emphasizing the importance of seniority in promotion decisions.
Experience for promotion must be calculated from the vacancy year, not the actual promotion date, as per the relevant rules.
The Non-Functional promotion under Rule 22(5)(b) is not a regular promotion and is different from the promotion made under Rule 22(5)(a), which is linked to vacancies and the reservation/quota system....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.