IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that challenges to promotions must be timely and adhere to established rules, with a focus on legality and procedural correctness.

Judgment & Order :

Both the writ petitions being intrinsically connected and filed by the same petitioners, the same were analogously heard and disposed of by this common judgment and order. The grievance is on the aspect of promotion of the petitioners vis-à-vis the private respondents.

2. There is a chequered history in these cases. The petitioners were promoted to the rank of Assistant Matrons in the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Assam (hereinafter the Department) as per recommendation of the DPC in the year 2018. Such promotions were however the subject matter of WP(C)/3069/2018 instituted by the All Assam Graduate Nurses Association. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 16.11.2020 as it was noticed that such promotions were made on the basis of two Gradation Lists which had culminated in the order dated 11.04.2018. The promotions orders were accordingly interfered with a further direction that a fresh promotion exercise be made in accordance with law. The petitioners herein had assailed the said judgment in WA/25/2021 which was however dismissed vide judgment and order dated 01.02.2021. Certain other writ appeals were also dismissed in the same line. After the matter was remanded, a common Gradation List in the rank of Staff Nurse was prepared. The grievance of the petitioners is that the private respondents are junior to them but have been placed above them in the Gradation List. It is contended that the appointments of the private respondents as Staff Nurse were not in accordance with law and in any case were made after that of the petitioners and therefore, they could not have stole a march over the petitioners in the Gradation List. It is also contended that it is only in the year 2021 upon publication of the Draft Gradation List that the petitioners could come to know about such appointments and therefore, could make the challenge.

3. In the first writ petition being WP(C)/2940/2021, the Gradation List dated 30.03.2021 was put to challenge and in the subsequent writ petition WP(C)/6006/2021, the promotion to the post of Sister Tutors to the private respondents have been specifically challenged.

4. I have heard Shri RC Saikia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. R. Bharali, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Shri DP Borah, learned Standing Counsel of the Department and Shri R. Singha, learned counsel for the private respondents.

5. Shri Saikia, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has, at the outset, clarified that so far as the earlier promotions made in the year 2018 are concerned, which were interfered by this Court, he is not joining any issue. The grievance is however in the manner the subsequent Gradation List was prepared and from the said Gradation List, promotions to the rank of Sister Tutors / Assistant Matrons have been affected. He submits that it was only on the publication of the Draft Gradation List on 13.03.2021 in the rank of Sister Tutor/Ward Sister that the promotion / appointment of the private respondents could be noticed. He has also submitted that against the Draft Gradation List, an objection was filed on 12.04.2021 and after taking recourse to the RTI Act to obtain certain information, a pleader’s notice dated 12.07.2021 was also served on the Director, which however were not responded to.

6. By drawing the attention of this Court to the Assam Nursing Services Rules, 1991 (hereinafter the Rules of 1991), the learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the said Rules lay down the procedure for appointment and promotion. He has submitted that under Rule 22, the Gradation List is to be prepared and published every year and in the instant case, the same has not been done. He has also submitted that the post of Sister Tutor is a promotional post which is to be filled up from Staff Nurse and there is no procedure for direct appointment. He has also referred to Rule 11 pertaining to appointment by promotion and under