The court ruled that a seniority condition in the appointment of a Court Officer does not prevent the incumbent's eligibility for promotion to a higher cadre, emphasizing that merit should prevail in promotional considerations.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. A. Chamuah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. G. Baishya, the learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. R. Mazumdar, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the private respondent Nos. 4 to 18.

2. The petitioner herein has approached this Court by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing and/or expunging the last paragraph of his Appointment order dated 18.04.2016 whereby a condition was incorporated that the petitioner would maintain his inter se seniority in his original cadre, i.e., Senior Judicial Assistant (hereinafter referred to as, “SJA”). The petitioner has also sought for consequential reliefs to the effect that the petitioner be considered to the post of Assistant Registrar in the Ministerial Stream.

CASE OF THE WRIT PETITIONER

3. The facts of the present case, as would be discerned from the perusal of the pleadings before this Court, are that the petitioner was appointed as a Computer Operator on 14.08.1996. Subsequent thereto, he was promoted to the post of Lower Division Assistant (for short, “LDA”) on 20.06.2007. The petitioner was further promoted to the post of Senior Administrative Assistant later on re-designated as SJA on 30.10.2013.

4. On 04.01.2016, a notice was issued by the Registrar (Administration) of the Gauhati High Court, inviting options from intending Administrative Officer (Judicial) (hereinafter referred to as, “A.O.(J)”) and SJA for filling up of 1 clear vacancy of Court Officer in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court. It was mentioned in the said notice that the selected candidate for the post of Court Officer would maintain his or her seniority in the original cadre and his or her further promotion would be considered on the basis thereof. Candidates who were willing to submit their options were directed to submit their service profile to the A.O.(J) (Establishment) on or before 25.01.2016. Subsequent thereto, the Registrar (Establishment) also issued another communication on 04.02.2016 calling for options.

5. The record reveals that 3 candidates submitted their options including the petitioner and they were directed to appear in an interview to be held on 28.03.2016. The petitioner was selected in the said selection process and was appointed temporarily and until further orders as a Court Officer in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court vide an Appointment Notification dated 18.04.2016. It was further mentioned in the said Notification that the petitioner would maintain his seniority in his original cadre, i.e., SJA and his further promotion would be considered on that basis. The relevant part of the said Notification being pertinent to the adjudication of the present dispute is reproduced herein under:

“NOTIFICATION

Dated Guwahati the 18th April, 2016

No. HC.V-11/94(pt-I)/288/Estt.## In exercise of the powers conferred under Article 229 of the Constitution of India, read with the Rule 7 of the Gauhati High Court Services (Appointment, Condition of service and Conduct) Rules, 1967 amended vide notification No. HC.XI-05/2015/167/RC dtd. 24.7.2015, Hon’ble the Chief Justice has been pleased to appoint Sri Jahirul Islam, Senior Judicial Assistant, temporarily and until further orders as Court Officer in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court at Gu