L DEVENDRAJIT SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the instant writ application is in respect of an order dated 2.4.1997 promoting the respondent No. 4 to the post of Sr. Lecturer (violin) in the Government Music College. Though the aforesaid order dated 2.4.1997 recites that the promotion of the respondent No. 4 has been made to the post of Sr. Lecturer (Violin), the said promotion has really been made to the post of Sr. Lecturer (Vocal) as evident from a conjoint reading of the orders dated 2.4.1997 and 30.7.1996 (Annexures-A/1 and A/2).

(2.) The petitioner who was appointed as Jr. Lecturer (Vocal) in the Government Music College by order dated 18.7.1986 has sought to challenge the aforesaid promotion of the respondent No. 4 primarily on the ground that the respondent No. 4 not having acquired the Visharad Degree in Vocal Music was not eligible for filing of the post of Sr. Lecturer (Vocal). Mr. Paonam, learned counsel for the petitioner, in this regard has drawn my attention to the provision of relevant recruitment Rules governing recruitment to the posts of Jr. Lecturer as well as Sr. Lecturer in the Government Music College. Insofar as Jr. Lecturers are concerned one of the conditions of eligibility is that the incumbent must have a Visharad Degree in the concerned subject. A similar requirement has also been prescribed for direct recruitment to the post of Sr. Lecturers. However, the post of Sr. Lecturers to be filled up by promotion under the recruitment Rules in force do not contain any such requirement and the only condition imposed is that an incumbent to be entitled for promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer must have rendered 5 years regular service as Jr. Lecturer. Mr. Paonam, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the omission to impose the same eligibility condition, i.e, that an incumbent to be entitled for promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer must also hold a degree in the concerned subject, has been inadvertently omitted from the R.R. and such a requirement must be read in the R.R. which would make the respondent No. 4 ineligible for the promotion in question. According to Mr Ponam, learned counsel for the petitioner, a person who has obtained a Visharad Degree in Violin can by no stretch of imagination can be eligible to fill the post of Sr. Lecturer (Vocal) as has happened in the present case.

(3.) Smt. Ch. Bidyamani Devi, learned Govt. advocate and Mr. Ng. Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 have advanced their respective arguments on behalf of the respondents. The learned counsels for the respective respondents have placed before the Court the averments made in the affidavit of the State to the effect that according to the State authority for filling the post of Sr. Lecturer by promotion from the cadre of Jr. Lecturer, it is not necessary that the Jr. Lecturer should have a Degree in the concerned subject. The learned counsels, therefore, contended that the omission in the relevant R.R. that a person should have a Visharad Degree in the concerned subject for promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer is a conscious omission while framing the Rules as in the considered view of the authority such a requirement is not necessary for filling the post of Sr. Lecturer by way of promotion. Smt. Bidyamani Devi, learned Govt. advocate has also drawn the attention of the Court to the seniority list of Jr. Lecturers enclosed to the affidavit of the State as well as the Minutes of the Proceedings of the DPC held on 13.3.1997 for selection of candidates for promotion to the post of Sr. Lecturer. The writ petitioner is, admittedly, junior to the respondent No. 4 and the Minutes of the DPC proceedings would reveal that the case of the petitioner was taken up for consideration by the DPC.