NOARAM TRIPURA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this writ petition, the petitioners questioned constitutional validity of Rule 11 of the Recruitment Rules for the post of CDPO (Child Development Project Officer) under the Education (Social Welfare & Social Education) Department, Government of Tripura and prayed for quashing the same with further direction to the respondents to put in place a reasonable provision for promotion to the post of CDPO.

(2.) The Rule impugned, for ready reference, is reproduced, which reads as follows :-

(3.) The petitioners were directly recruited in the posts of Superintendent of Homes on different dates in the year 1998. A combined tentative seniority list for all the Superintendent of Home/Assistant Inspector of Social Education/Extension Officer/Social Education Organiser/ Supervisor(ICDS/RFLP) under the Directorate of the Social Welfare & Social Education (for short 'SWSE') by Memorandum dated 27.09.2006 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) was prepared and published to which the Officers working as Superintendent of Homes, i.e., petitioners, raised serious objection and thereafter separate seniority list for the posts of Superintendent of Home was prepared and published by Memorandum dated 06.08.2007 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition). It is the contention of the petitioners that the post of Superintendent of Homes carries the pay scale of Rs.5,000- 10,300/- whereas the post of Supervisor/Social Education Organiser carries the pay scale of Rs.4,200-8,650/- and, therefore, the posts of Supervisor/Social Education Organiser (for short 'SEO') are inferior posts to that of the post of Superintendent of Homes and both the posts cannot be treated at par for promotion to the posts of CDPO. The provision of Rule 11, therefore, is violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, hence, liable to be struck down.