VEDUZO SASU Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute involved in the present writ petition is with regard to the inter-se-seniority between the writ petitioners and the private respondents. According to the petitioners, they were directly appointed as Block Development Officers (BDO) through a selection process while the private respondents have been absorbed and regularized to the said post after they were either appointed on contract basis or brought on deputation from other Departments except for respondent No. 17, who was promoted from a lower post to the post of BDO.

(2.) Heard Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Taka Masa, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Arenlong, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 4 to 16. Also heard Mr. K Wotsa, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. None appears for the respondent No. 17 despite notice.

(3.) Brief facts of the case essential for disposal of the writ petition may be noticed at the outset. Pursuant to the advertisement floated by the Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC) vide Addendum dtd. 12/7/2012 for 16 posts of BDO under the Rural Development Department which was responded to by the petitioners, they participated in the selection process and were selected and appointed as BDOs between 4/7/2013 and 31/1/2014. As for the private respondent Nos. 4 to 16, they were either initially serving as Assistant Teacher, Graduate Teachers, Lower Division Assistant and Supervisor (Class-III) Non-Gazetted in other Departments of the State Government or were appointed as Rural Development Officer (RDO) on contract basis for a specified period between 3/12/1999 to 18/3/2010. As for the respondent No. 17, she was initially appointed as Mukhya Savika (MS) on 10/12/2003 for initial period of 6 (six) months and her service was regularized w.e.f. 19/2/2009 vide Order dtd. 7/4/2009. Thereafter, she was given officiating promotion to the post of BDO/RDO Vide Order dtd. 11/11/2013. The petitioner No. 17 is placed below the petitioner Nos. 1 to 14 in the Tentative Seniority List issued vide Memorandum dtd. 19/10/2015 but above the petitioner No. 15. The State Government in the Rural Development Department vide Memorandum dtd. 19/10/2015 issued a tentative seniority list of officers under the establishment of Rural Development Department as on 1/10/2015 (Annexure-12) and thereafter, another Tentative Seniority List vide Memorandum dtd. 23/4/2018 (Annexure-16). In both memorandums, the petitioners have been placed below the private respondents in the seniority and aggrieved with the same, a representation was submitted to the respondent authorities concerned, which however came to be rejected by the Rural Development Departmental Seniority Dispute Committee in its meeting held on 16/10/2018. Aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court.