H KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition filed, the writ petitioners have instituted the present proceeding in appeal.

(2.) The facts that will have to be noticed for an effective adjudication of the questions raised may briefly be enumerated herein. The petitioners are holding the posts of Senior Specialists in Grade-II of the Manipur Health Service. The cadre of Senior Specialist under the Rules in force consists of 33 posts in different disciplines. Under Rule 7 of the Rules, promotional avenue to Grade I of the service has been provided to persons holding the posts of Senior Specialist in Grade II Out of the total of 14 posts in Grade I, there are 7 posts of Consultant (Specialist). While 75% of the posts of Specialist in Grade-I are required to be filled up by promotion from eligible candidates in Grade II service, 25% of such posts are to be filled up by direct recruitment. Under the provisions of the Rules, for promotion to the post of Specialist in Grade I, only such Officers in Grade-II who possess qualifications appropriate to the posts mentioned in Annexure to the Schedule-II of the Rules would be eligible. According to the petitioners a post of Specialist/Consultant in Grade-I fell vacant with effect from 06-09- 1999. An attempt to allot the said post to the discipline of Neurosurgery and fill up the same by a process of direct recruitment was initiated in the year 2000, which, however, did not materialize on account of objections raised by the Public Service Commission on the ground that in the Annexure to Schedule-II of the Rules, the discipline/subject of Neurosurgery was not included. Thereafter, by a memorandum dated 15-03-2001, Item 2(A) was included in the Annexure to Schedule-n after item 2 and between Item 2 and 3 as already existing. Item 2(A) as included in the Annexure to Schedule-n is in the following terms:

(3.) We have heard Mr. G. N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. D. K. Misra, learned senior counsel appearing for the official respondents. Mr. N. Koteshwar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 has also been heard.