ORDER

Date : 28-11-2024 Heard Mr. S. Chetia, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. B.

Bhattacharjee, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. P.P. Dutta, learned standing counsel, Sivasagar Municipal Board (SMB)

appearing for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 10-06-2022 issued by the respondent No. 6 cancelling his promotion to the post of Upper Division Assistant (UDA) and thereafter, his appointment as Head Assistant (HA) of the Sivasagar Municipal Board (SMB) and reverting him back to the original post of Lower Division Assistant (LDA) on the ground that the entire process was vitiated by serious irregularities. The primary ground of challenge made to the impugned order dated 10-06- 2022 it that the order has been issued in utter violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the writ petitioner was appointed as LDA in the SMB way back in the year 1995. While serving as an LDA, the petitioner was promoted to the post of UDA vide order dated 13-02-2020 issued in deference to the resolution No. 4(A) adopted in the meeting of the Board held on 28-08-2019 in the conference hall of SMB. Thereafter, the writ petitioner was entrusted with the charge of Head Assistant of the Board with immediate effect, vide order dated 15-02-2020. Subsequently, the respondent No. 6 had issued the impugned order dated 10-06-2022 cancelling the assignment of charge to the petitioner in the post of Head Assistant and also his promotion to the post of UDA vide order dated 13-02-2020 and reverted him back to the original post of LDA. That apart, in the impugned order, a direction was also issued to recover the excess salary which the petitioner had drawn in the post of Head Assistant. The promotion given to the petitioner from the post of LDA to UDA was apparently interfered with on the ground that the same was issued without obtaining administrative approval from the relevant committee and was also in violation of the Govt. guidelines. It appears that the respondents have relied upon the order dated 17-12-2016 issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Urban Development Department which had made it mandatory for the Municipal Board and Town Committees to obtain prior approval before making fresh recruitment/ engagement of personnel in Municipal Boards and Town Committees.

4. By referring to the materials available on record, Mr. Chetia, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has argued that the circular dated 17-12-2016 is applicable in case of fresh recruitments and the same would not have any bearing in the cases of promotion given to the internal departmental candidates. That apart, submits Mr. Chetia even assuming that there was some valid ground for the respondents to issue the impugned order dated 10- 06-2022, even then, the petitioner ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard before being reverted to the post of LDA thus, adversely affecting his interest in the matter. On such ground, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner has made a request to set aside the order dated 10-06-2022.

5. Responding to the above arguments, Mr. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 has argued that the procedure adopted for promoting the petitioner from the post of LDA to the post of UDA was not in accordance with the provisions of the rules or guidelines laid down by the Govt. of Assam. That apart submits Mr. Dutta, within 02 days from his promotion to the post of UDA, the petitioner was asked to discharge the function of Head Assistant, that too, by giving a go by to the requirement of the rules. Therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order dated 10-06-2022 issued by the respondent authority. Mr. Dutta has, however, submitted in his usual fairness that since reversion of the petitioner from the post of UDA to LDA would have