The court emphasized the necessity for a fair amalgamated seniority list for police personnel to ensure equitable treatment, directing the State to complete the list within three months.

JUDGMENT

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - The Petitioners were appointed in the Indian Reserve Battalion (hereinafter, the 'IRB') as Constables, on 01-03-1996 and promoted variously, to the ranks of Lance Naik, Naik and Head Constables as per seniority and available vacancies in IRB Units. That, in the year 2019, they were in service for approximately twenty-three years.

2(i). Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the only prayer in the Petition that is being pressed today is a part of prayer (iv) i.e., preparation and publication of an amalgamated Seniority list of the four forces, the second part of the prayer pertaining to the protection of the seniority of the Petitioners at the level of Head Constables is not being urged presently.

The prayer is as follows;

'Under the above facts and circumstance, it is, therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit this petition, call for the records and issue Rule calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ of mandamus/Certiorai and appropriate writ/order or direction may not be issued commanding and directing the Respondent authorities to; show cause as to why:-

i) .................................................................

ii) .................................................................

iii) .................................................................

iv) An amalgamated seniority list of the Four Forces by duly protecting the seniority of the petitioners at the level of Head Constables shall not be prepared and published.' [emphasis supplied]

(ii) That, in terms of the prayer, the State Respondent Nos.1 to 3 be directed to prepare an amalgamated Seniority List of the four Police Forces of the Sikkim Police Force (Recruitment, Promotion and Seniority) Rules, 2000. That, the Petitioners be granted liberty to approach the Court, if so advised, should they be aggrieved by the Seniority List prepared by the State-Respondents No.1 to 3. Attention of this Court was invited to the Order of this Court dated 27-06-2022, wherein the State-Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 had submitted that no amalgamated Seniority List was prepared by the State-Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and therefore they have no such List to file.

(iii) Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners urged that a common Seniority List is essential for the Petitioners, to gauge their position in the overall seniority ranking of the amalgamated four services, for which strength was garnered from the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Sikkim and Others v. Adup Tshering Bhutia and Others (2014) 12 SCC 507, wherein it was inter alia observed as follows;

'2. The State is bound to ensure a fair and equitable treatment to officers in various categories/cadres of services while preparing the common seniority list. ...............'

That, this observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court be adhered to by the State-Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General for the State- Respondent Nos.1 to 3 while walking this Court through the circumstances which led to the instant Writ Petition, advanced the submission that the inter se Seniority List in terms of the Notification bearing No.73/GEN/DOP, dated 09-08-2018, issued by the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms, Training and Public Grievances, Gangtok, Government of Sikkim, shall be prepared, for which three months time may be afforded.

4. Mr. Zangpo Sherpa, Learned Counsel for the Private Respondents endorsed the submissions put forth by the Learned Additional Advocate General and had no independent submissions to advance.

5(i). To appreciate the matter in its correct perspective the crux of the dispute is being narrated. Prior to the constitution of the integrated Sikkim Police Force with effect from 11-09-2000 as per the Sikkim Police Force