Promotions within public service must adhere to established criteria to uphold equality under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, prohibiting arbitrary decisions that favor select individuals.

JUDGMENT

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - The Petitioner herein, an aspirant to the post of Joint Secretary in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly Secretariat (for short, the 'SLAS'), is disgruntled by the State action of granting promotion to the Respondent No.2 (for short, 'R2'), to the post of Joint Secretary, by way of upgradation, duly relaxing the relevant Rules, without considering the Petitioner for promotion to the same post, although he was similarly situated with R2 and held a higher educational qualification. He seeks a declaration that the impugned promotion of R2 is mala fide, arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional being against the provisions of the Sikkim Legislative Assembly Secretariat (Methods of Recruitment and Qualifications for Appointment) Order, 1984, dated 20-05-1985 (hereinafter, 'Recruitment Order 1984'). That, a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding the Respondent No.1 (for short, 'R1') to cancel the impugned promotion order of the R2 and a writ or order be issued directing R1 to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Joint Secretary.

2(i). Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner while walking this Court through the brief facts of the case advanced the arguments that the Petitioner joined service in the SLAS against a regular sanctioned post of Assistant Language Translator vide Office Order dated 05-03-1999. In the year 2004, on clearing the Limited Departmental Examination, he was appointed as Nepali Translator vide Office Order dated 02-03-2004. Being eligible for promotion in terms of Rule 7 of the Recruitment Order 1984 to the post of Under Secretary in the year 2009, he made representations dated 28-05-2008, 16-12-2008, 16-09-2009 to R1 and 25-05-2009 to the Speaker, SLAS. He was promoted as Under Secretary vide Office Order dated 30-03-2010 w.e.f. 24-03-2010. On 15-09- 2013, the Petitioner applied for a one time relaxation of Rules for grant of promotion by upgradation to the post of Deputy Secretary after serving for three and half years as Under Secretary on coming to learn that proposals for promotion of other employees of the department with similar years of service in one Grade was also under consideration. However, a few months' later Notification bearing No.285/436/ADMN/SLAS, dated 27-11-2013, was issued by the SLAS, notifying that henceforth upgradation of post would be limited to once in the entire service career of each individual employee. That, on consideration of his representations dated 04- 07-2014 and 25-03-2016, he was promoted to a vacant post in the rank of Deputy Secretary, vide Office Order dated 16-11-2016 with effect from 02-09-2016.

(ii) That, R2 for his part joined service on 02-05-1983 and was promoted as Under Secretary w.e.f. 24-03-2010 on the same date as the Petitioner and his post upgraded to that of Deputy Secretary w.e.f. 02-09-2016, i.e., on the same date as the Petitioner. However, on a representation filed by R2, one post of Deputy Secretary was upgraded to that of Joint Secretary by issuance of Order No.403/ADMN/SLAS, dated 24-09-2020, and R2 was promoted therein, with effect from 16-09-2020. It was contended that the SLAS deemed it expedient to decrease the prescribed eligibility criteria of six years of regular service as Deputy Secretary for promotion to the post of Joint Secretary to four years, for the pensionary benefits of R2, as requested by him, in consideration of his length of service and precedent in the SLAS. It was further contended that the provisions of Rule 7 of the Recruitment Order 1984 specify that promotion would be on the basis of merit-cum-seniority, academic qualification and consideration of all eligible officers together for promotion. Despite