Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
RAJESH MAZUMDAR
Biman Borah, S/o Late Bogai Borah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam Health And Family Welfare (A) Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishing the service trajectory and history of service changes. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 19 , 20) |
| 2. procedural challenges regarding seniority disputes and official state responses. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. seniority is unaffected by transfers made in public interest. (Para 17 , 18 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. quashing erroneous gradation lists and directing departmental promotional proceedings. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH MAZUMDAR, J.
Heard Mr B D Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr M Bhuyan, learned counsel representing the Health and Family Welfare Department, for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Mr N Haque, learned counsel appears for the private respondents.
2. The matter had been heard on earlier occasions and today, the counsels were required to file their written arguments.
3. The petitioner had joined his services in the office of the Joint Director of Health Services, Dhemaji, as an LDA-cum-Typist, (which is now redesignated as a Junior Assistant). By the notification dated 27.03.1996, issued by the Joint Director of Health Services, Assam, his services were regularized w.e.f. 01
The seniority for promotions in government services must be based on the order of appointment, not merely on merit lists, ensuring compliance with eligibility criteria.
The Validation Act stipulates that service duration from adhoc appointments cannot influence seniority, confirming the petitioner’s senior status over the respondent.
Point of Law : 10. Court should not embark upon on and enquiry into the merits of the case and that writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of laches alone.
The court determined that a petitioner cannot claim seniority or promote based on service from a distinct establishment due to separate seniority rules.
The court established that seniority must be determined by the date of first appointment, and settled seniority cannot be revised after a significant delay.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
