LAWS(GAU)-2013-11-60

MADHAB CH. KAIBARTA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On November 21, 2013
Madhab Ch. Kaibarta Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the writ petitions pertaining to the same issue i.e. promotion to the post of Supervisory Assistant (SA) upon fixation of seniority of the incumbents have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The petitioner involved in W.P. (C) No. 2681/2005 (the first writ petition) and W.P. (C) No. 2878/2009 (the second writ petition) seeks promotion to the post of UDA with retrospective effect ahead of the petitioner and the private respondent (respondent No. 3) involved in W.P. (C) No. 7464/2005 (the third writ petition) with consequential fixation of seniority above them and promotion to the post of SA.

(2.) WHILE the petitioner involved in the first and the second writ petitions was initially appointed as Laboratory Assistant in the year 1982, the petitioner involved in the third writ petition and the respondent No. 3 therein were appointed as LDA on 13.11.1985 and 1.4.1985 respectively. According to the petitioner, who was appointed as Laboratory Assistant, the post of Laboratory Assistant and LDA both are in the common cadre and accordingly on the basis of the seniority above the other two LDAs, he ought to have been promoted to the post of UDA much ahead of them. 13e it stated here that the petitioner and the private respondents involved in the third writ petition i.e. W.P. (C) No. 7464/2005 had been promoted to the post of UDA with effect from 1.10.1993. Initially, the private respondent namely Smt. Narmada Deka was promoted with effect from 1.10.1993 and the petitioner was promoted with effect from 1.11.1996. However, pursuant to the judgment and order dated 9.10.2002 passed by the Assam Administrative Tribunal in appeal No. 49 ATA/2001, she was also promoted to the post of UDA from the same date i.e. 1.10.1993. She was also given seniority above said Smt. Deka.

(3.) IN the second writ petition i.e. W.P. (C) No. 2878/2009, the petitioner has called in question the Annexure -17 communication dated 11.12.2007 made to the Director of the Department by the Government in the Higher Education (Tech) Department. By the said communication, it was conveyed that there was no need for any separate service rules for the Ministerial Staff of the Directorate of Historical and Antiquarian Studies with which department, this proceeding is concerned, in view of the available of common service rules for heads of department namely the Assam Directorate Establishment (Ministerial) Service Rules, 1973.