KESHAB CH PAUL Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned senior counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. B.P. Kataky, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents Nos. 4 to 7. Also heard Mr. H.K. Mahanta, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam.

(2.) A selection was held for appointment to the post of L.D. A. in the establishment of the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar in the year 1990 and pursuant thereto a select list was prepared and published on 20.4.90. The name of the petitioner appeared at SI. No. 2 of the Select list whereas the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 were placed at SI. No. 3 to 6. By an order dated 23.4.1990, the respondents Nos.4 to 7 were appointed as L.D.A.s but the case of the petitioner was not considered for appointment on the ground that there were some objections raised regarding the involvement of the petitioner in a criminal case. The petitioner instituted a writ proceeding i.e. Civil Rule No. 859/90 before this Court contending that he had been acquitted by the appellate judgment and order passed in the criminal proceedings registered against him. This court taking note of the contentions advanced, byjudgment and order dated 16.5.90, directed the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar to give appointment to the writ petitioner which was accordingly done on 23.5.90. The seniority of the ministerial staff in the establishment of the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar was provisionally circulated by Memo dated 31.12.94 wherein the petitioner was shown junior to the respondent Nos. 4 to 7, on the basis of his date of appointment. The petitioner objected to the seniority assigned to him by filling a representation before the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar. When the same was dismissed, the petitioner filed an appeal before the State Government and though the petitioner was heard in the said appeal on 20.10.95, the final order in the appeal was not pronounced in time. The petitioner represented before the appellate authority for pronouncement of the verdict and all attempts in this regard having failed, a proceeding registered as W.P.(C) No. 2438 of 1999 was instituted by the writ petitioner before this Court. The aforesaid writ proceeding was finalised by order dated 24.5.99 passed by this Court, inter-alia, directed the appellate authority to pass final orders on the appeal petition filed by the writ petitioner after hearing both sides i.e. including the present respondent Nos. 4 to 7. Thereafter the appeal filed by the petitioner having been dismissed by orer dated 18.3.2000, the instant writ petition has been instituted against the aforesaid order passed in appeal.

(3.) Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner has contended that the petitioner being placed higher in merit than the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in the select list for appointment and the appointment of the writ petitioner having been held back on grounds which were subsequently established to be not justified, the seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of L.D.A. vis-a-vis the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 has to be determined on the basis of the merit position in the select list and not as per the date of appointment or date of joining. So computed, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner would be senior to the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and the March that the said respondents had stolen over the writ petitioner is required to be appropriately halted by giving suitable relief to the writ petitioner.