IMPORTANT POINT
The employer's discretion in refusing to relax essential qualifications for promotion under the new rules was upheld by the court.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. B Chetri, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P Nayak, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Though multiple prayers are made in this writ petition, however, Mr. Chetri, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he will confine his arguments relating to the prayers A, C and D of the petition.

3. The basic challenge in this writ petition is an order dated 30.10.2021 passed by the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Assam pursuant to the order(s) of this court dated 22.09.2021, 06.10.2021 and 07.10.2021 passed in WP(C) No.5136/2021, WP(C) No.5376/2021 and WP(C) No.5501/2021 respectively. The aforesaid writ petitions were preferred by the present petitioners and their cases for consideration for promotion to the next higher grade was directed in terms of power of relaxation of Rule 16 of the Assam Secretariat Service Rules, 2019, (hereinafter referred to as Rules 19).

4. The Chief Secretary by the impugned order dated 30.10.2021 rejected the prayer of the petitioners that relaxation of educational qualification cannot be granted in each and every case inasmuch as such action will defeat the very purpose of enacting the new Rules 2019, which is issued by repealing the earlier rule i.e., the Assam Secretariat Service Rules, 1963.

5. Pursuant to this court’s order dated 14.12.2023, Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent has produced the record pertaining to the consideration of the case of the petitioners under Rule 16 of the Rules 19.

6. From the pleadings of the petitioners made in this writ petition as well as from the record as aforesaid the following facts are discernible.

I. Even prior to approaching this court by the petitioners, a memorandum was submitted by the Assam Secretariat Service Association including some individual employees for relaxation of educational qualification for promotion to the next higher post.

II. Under the Assam Secretariat Service Rules 1963, (hereinafter referred to as the Rule 1963), the qualification for promotion from the post of Junior Administrative Assistant to the post of Superintendent the required qualification is at least 5 years of service as Senior Administrative Assistant/Upper Division Assistant and confirmation in that cadre.

III. Rules 1963 was repealed by another set of Rules, namely the Assam Secretariat Service Rules, 2019. In terms of the Rules of 2019, the qualification for promotion to the post of Superintendent is 5 years of continuous service as Administrative Assistant, passed Group – B training or equivalent as prescribed by the Government. Proviso to Rule 5 mandates that such a candidate must possess a graduate degree in any stream as academic qualification from any recognized university.

IV. Rule 16 of the 2019 rules further provides that when the government is satisfied that operation of any of these rules has caused undue hardship, it may dispense with or relax the rule to such extent and subject to such conditions as it may consider necessary for dealing with the case, in a just and equitable manner.

V. According to the petitioners, they are having the required qualification, however for the proviso mandated under the Rule 5 of the Rules 2019, they are deprived of such promotion, however, at the time of their entry into service such prescription was not there and the petitioners are non graduates.

VI. The petitioners represented before the respondent authorities to relax their educational qualification inasmuch it is their case that by virtue of the new rule 2019, undue hardship has been caused to them and equity and justice shall demand that rules are relaxed and their cases for promotion are considered as consideration for promotion is a very valuable right.

VII. Such representations, as is discernible from the records, were considered by the respondent employer and the Additional Chief Secretary had put a note on 20.10.2021. The relevant portion is quoted herein below:

“Although the provisions of Rule 16 stipulates that the