The court affirmed the necessity of submitting all required documents for promotion eligibility, highlighting that the DPC rightly promoted the next eligible candidate due to the appellant's non-compliance.

Judgment :

Kardak Ete, J.

1. Heard Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent No. 1; Mr. T. Tagum, learned Standing counsel, Education Department for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and Mr. M. Kato, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

2. This intra Court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 516/2019, whereby, the writ petition has been dismissed holding that the petitioner/appellant could not submit the required documents before the meeting of the DPC held on 07.06.2018 for consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant in the Department of Elementary Education.

3. Brief Facts of the Case:

(i). The appellant/petitioner, Smti Mumsu Borang, has been serving in the post of Upper Division Clerk (UDC) in the Education Department since 17.12.2004. The post of UDC is a feeder post for promotion to the post of Assistant. The petitioner’s educational qualification is Class XII passed, an educational qualification required for promotion to the post of Assistant under the Recruitment Rules at the relevant time.

(ii). In the year 2018, two posts of Assistant fell vacant. The Department issued notices seeking submission of relevant documents from all eligible candidates in the feeder cadre, including the petitioner, whose name appeared at Sl. No. 2 in the seniority list of UDCs. The DPC meeting was held on 07.06.2018. However, the case of the petitioner was not recommended for promotion by the DPC on the ground that she had submitted only her Class XII certificate and no other documents. On the basis of the DPC’s recommendation, the private respondent No. 4, whose name was at Sl. No.3 in the seniority list, was promoted on 01.03.2019, as she had graduate degree and other related documents found to be valid.

(iii). The petitioner contended that, at the time of the DPC meeting, a Graduation/Bachelor degree was not an essential requirement for promotion to the post of Assistant, in view of the temporary suspension of the minimum qualification requirement under Office Memorandum No.AR- 74/2013/1258, dated 27.05.2015, which suspended the applicability of Notification No.AR-74/2013/1258, dated 28.01.2014, prescribing Graduation/Bachelor degree as the minimum qualification for promotion to Group B posts. Being senior in service and within the zone of consideration, she contended that she was entitled to be promoted. Nevertheless, her case was bypassed by the DPC and her junior, respondent No.4, was promoted.

(iv). Aggrieved by the action of the authorities, the petitioner filed WP(C) No. 516/2019 seeking quashing of the promotion of respondent No.4 and for granting her promotion to the post of Assistant, retrospectively from 01.02.2019, the date on which respondent No.4 was promoted.

(v). The respondent authorities contended that the petitioner failed to submit essential documents including APARs/ACRs for the last five years, Vigilance Clearance Certificate, performance reports and educational certificates, despite reminders issued through Departmental Circulars dated 27.03.2018 and 21.05.2018. Consequently, the DPC meeting of 07.06.2018 could not recommend her case and the next eligible candidate in the seniority list, respondent No. 4, was promoted. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant in the DPC meeting held on 25.01.2022, after submission of all necessary documents.

(vi). The learned Single Judge, upon perusal of the pleadings, DPC minutes, departmental records and seniority lists, held that the petitioner had failed to submit the require