PUSPA KANTA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.B.Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Thakur, learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents. None appears on behalf of the private respondent Nos. 5 and 6 notwithstanding notice.

(2.) The only grievance in the instant case is that the petitioner, admittedly being senior to respondent Nos. 5 and 6, working under respondent No. 2 Director General of Police, Assam, Ulubari, has been denied his due promotion from the Upper Division Assistant to the rank of Head Assistant when his juniors i.e., respondents Nos. 5 and 6 were promoted to the post of Head Assistant by the impugned order dated 21.10.2000 issued by respondent No.3, the Deputy Inspector of Police, Assam, Guwahati. According to him, the criteria for such promotion is 'seniority cum merit' and in support of this contention, reliance has been placed on the government decision/instruction vide No. ABP. 178/74/2 dtd. 26.8.74 and No. ABP. 178/74/6 dtd. 8.7.77 (Annexure-4 and 5 to the writ petition) respectively.

(3.) Responding to the averments and allegations made in the writ petition, the respondents filed affidavit-in-opposition virtually admitting the claim of the petitioner as regards his seniority over the respondent Nos. 5 and 6. The respondents also admitted that the selection for such promotion was being made on the basis of ' seniority' as well as efficiency' in accordance with the above referred government decisions/instructions. But the said affidavit did not spell out the reason for not recommending the name of the petitioner for promotion to the higher post as claimed.