A.A. LASKAR Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Abigail Hmingthanpari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Aldrin Lallawmzuala, learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. N. Sailo, learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. None appears for the respondent No. 5 i.e. Mizoram Public Service Commission and respondent No. 7. Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel submits that the present writ petition is directed against the order dated 9.7.2013 passed by the respondent No. 1 and the notification dated 2.8.2013 whereby the respondent No. 7 was transferred and posted as Dy. SP CPW from Dy. S.P Security.

(2.) Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel also submits that the respondent No. 6 as writ petitioners had also approached this Court by way of WP(C) No. 36/2013 challenging the notification dated 3.1.2013 by which the post of Dy. S.P (Mechanic) was decadred from the duty post of Mizoram Police Service and also the notification dated 31.1.2013 correcting the name of the post of Dy. SP (Mechanic) to that of Dy. SP(CPW). This Court by order dated 23.4.2013 had disposed of the WP(C) No. 36/2013 directing the respondent No. 1 to consider the representation dated 8.4.2013 filed by the writ petitioner therein/respondent No. 6 and pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Consequently, the respondent No. 1 i.e. Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram had passed an order dated 9.7.2013 disposing of the representation dated 8.4.2013 in compliance of the order of this Court. In the said order dated 9.7.2013, amongst others, it is also reflected that the representation of the Association/respondent No. 6 are found to be genuine and that the respondent No. 1 is of the view that the post of Dy. SP (CPW) shall be re-encadred to the duty post of Mizoram Police Service (Amendment) Rules, 2012. It was also stated that the process for amendment of the Schedule-I of the Mizoram Police Service Rules shall be initiated forthwith.

(3.) Mr. Aldrin Lallawmzuala, learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram submits that the order dated 9.7.2013 passed by the respondent No. 1 was in compliance of the direction of this Court's order dated 23.4.2013 while disposing of WP(C) No. 36/2013. There is nothing wrong in the order dated 9.7.2013 inasmuch as the observation made by the respondent No. 1 therein cannot be taken to be final as further steps subsequent to the order dated 9.7.2013 will have to be taken in accordance with laid down procedures. Therefore, no interference is called to the order dated 9.7.2013. He also submits that the impugned notification dated 2.8.2013 was by way of an interim measure inasmuch as the State respondents are contemplating for amending the Mizoram Police Service (Amendment) Rules, 2012. It is also the submission of the learned Addl. A.G that the notification dated 2.8.2013 was stayed by this Court and, therefore all steps consequent to the order dated 9.7.2013 were stopped as the State respondents were under the impression that the same is sub-judiced before this Court. He therefore submits that the notification dated 2.8.2013 also requires no interference.