LILY VAIKHUMA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :- The petitioner herein approached this court on the strength of Art. 226 of the Constitution of India alleging violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and intending to challenge notification No. A. 23021/2/80-APT (B) dated 4/9/1992 of Governor of Mizoram wherein her name has not been shown in the inter-se-seniority list of Under Secretaries to the Government of Mizoram, Secretariat Group 'A' Services (Ministerial Cadre), notification dated 28/8/2001 and the inter departmental note No. A. 32018/1/2001-PAR (GSW) dated 18.3.2002 issued by the Under Secretary, DP & AR, alleging violation of principle of natural justice by arbitrary, illegal and mala fide rejection of her claim to seniority and refusal of promotion etc.etc.

(2.) Facts in brief areas follows : The petitioner, Smt. Lily Vaikhuma, working as Stenographer Grade I in the year 1986 was appointed Assistant Project Officer (General Co-ordination) in the State Level Monitoring Cell (SLMC) in the Rural Development Department on deputation in the pay scale of Rs. 650-1200.00 p.m. vide order dated 25/2/86 of the Development Commissioner and Secretary, Rural Development Department. By a subsequent order dated 4/3/86 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Govt. of Mizoram, DP & AR her service was put on deputation for 3(three) years with effect from the date of order. In the meantime, vide notification dated 25/10/88 Mizoram Secretariat (Group 'A') Recruitment Rules, 1977 was amended to provide promotion of Stenographer Grade I to Under Secretary in Mizoram Civil Service (MCS) to the extent of 5% quota provided that such Stenographer has rendered five years regular service in the Grade. Pursuant to such amended rules the petitioner was promoted by respondent no.2 on 7/12/1988 to the post of Under Secretary in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000.00 p.m. and placed under Finance Department of Govt. of Mizoram. That her service was repatriated to her parent department, i.e. the DP & AR, vide order dated 9/12/88 and the petitioner joined as Under Secretary in the Civil Secretariat of Govt. of Mizoram on 6/2/89. That her service was thereafter placed under the Governor's Secretariat, Mizoram as Private Secretary to the Governor vide notification dated 8/3/1990 and she was allowed to draw her pay and allowances against the sanctioned post of Under Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department. While she was discharging her function as Private Secretary against her substantive appointment of Under Secretary vide order dated 30/10/92 her name was included in the list of Head of Departments in respect of Governor's Secretariat and she was invested with financial power under the Delegation of Financial Power Rules, 1978. Unfortunately, her name was not included in the inter-se- seniority list of the Under Secretaries belonging to the Ministerial Cadre published by the Government on 4/9/92, but on her repeated representation finally the name of petitioner was included in the inter-se-seniority list of the Under Secretaries (MMS) vide notification dated 11/8/98. But to her utter disappoint- ment on 28/8/2001 vide notification annexure 17, three juniors to her in the inter- se-seniority list, the private respondent herein, were promoted to the post of Deputy Secretaries (Grade III of the MMS) superseding her, in spite of fact that she was qualified and eligible for being considered for promotion to the aforesaid post of Deputy Secretary. That such action of respondents No. 1/2 is most arbitrary, illegal and malafide which is highly prejudicial and detrimental to her interest as public servant. That the petitioner came to know later on that without her knowledge her name was deleted from the inter-se-seniority list of the Under Secretaries before effecting the order of promotion of her juniors in the service leaving her in anxiety with demoralising effect etc. The petitioner made representations to vindicate justice but vide impugned inter departmental note dated 18/3/2002, to her dismay, her claim was rejected on the ground that her name was included in the inter- se-seniority list wrongly and in contravention to the MMS Rule, 1993. That such action of the Government to the disadvantage the petitioner had amounted to violation of the right accrued in her favour and cannot be sustained in law. That although by subsequent 3rd amendment of the relevant Rules w.e.f. 13/3/91, the 5% quota reserved for promotion of Stenographer Grade I to Under Secretary has been done away with, this cannot effect her career adversely and the view expressed by the respondent Government department vide inter-departmental note No. A. 32018/1/2001-PAR (GSW) dated 18/3/2002 is totally improper and accordingly not sustainable in law and liable to be interfered with for ends of justice etc.

(3.) Accordingly, she prayed for direction to the respondent Government to include name of the petitioner in the inter- se-seniority list of Under Secretaries of the Mizoram ministerial Cadre at appropriate place and to consider her case for promotion to the Deputy Secretary in the MMS cadre with effect from same date when her juniors in service were promoted vide order dated 28/8/2001 to the post of Deputy Secretary with all consequential benefits etc.