LOHIT KUMAR KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions being filed by the same petitioner and connected, an analogous hearing was done and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The principal grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the aspect of his promotion to the post of Associate Professor of Oncology in the Guwahati Medical College and Hospital.

(2.) Before going to the issue involved, it would be convenient if the facts of the cases are narrated in brief.

(3.) The petitioner is a Master of Surgery (M.S.) in Orthopedics which he had obtained in the year 2008. In the same year, vide an order dtd. 19/3/2008, the Department of Oncology was created in the Guwahati Medical College Hospital, Guwahati (hereinafter GMCH) with 29 posts including 3 posts of Registrars. Both the petitioner and the private respondent no.7 had applied for the post of Registrar and in the selection so held, the petitioner was selected as the first nominee and was accordingly appointed as Registrar of Oncology on 17/7/2008. After completion of the requisite number of years and having found eligible by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), the petitioner was recommended for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor of Oncology on 5/7/2011 and thereafter was promoted to the same post on 4/8/2011. It is submitted that the higher post thereafter is the post of Associate Professor for which an eligibility of 2 years of service as Assistant Professor is required and the criteria for promotion is 'seniority cum merit'. In the meantime, vide an order dtd. 9/9/2014, the respondent no.7 was also promoted as Assistant Professor. An experience certificate dtd. 27/8/2012 was issued by the Health Department to the petitioner as per which, the petitioner meets the requirement of serving for at least 2 years in the feeder cadre of Assistant Professor. On 22/11/2013, a DPC was held which however had come to a finding that no eligible candidates were found for the post of Associate Professor. Subsequently, on 9/9/2014, another DPC was held with the same remark. As indicated above, in the said DPC, the respondent no.7 was made as Assistant Professor. The petitioner has obtained the note sheet from the original file by invoking the Right to Information Act and as per note dtd. 8/1/2014, the petitioner was held to be fit for promotion. It also transpires from the said information that the certificate regarding the fitness was not placed before the DPC.