STATE OF MANIPUR Vs. A SUBHASH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal by the State of Manipur is directed against the judgment dated January 11, 2002 passed by the learned Single judge in Writ Petition (C) No. 896/2000, whereby, vide common judgment, the learned Single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition (C) No. 896/2000 and Writ Petition (C) No. 1347/2000. Both these writ petitions were filed by Respondent No. 1 Dr. A. Subhas Singh (hereinafter referred to as the Writ Petitioner for convenience).

(2.) The Writ Petitioner joined the Manipur State Services as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon (V.A.S.) vide order dated January 24, 1974. The Writ Petitioner was given ad-hoc promotion as Research Officer (Cattle) vide order dated February 6, 1981 and subsequently, his promotion was regularized vide order dated November 28, 1984. At the relevant point of time, the recruitment rules of 1978 governed the matter. Thereafter, the Manipur Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Service Rules, 1993 came into effect from January 18, 1993. The 1993 Rules had a very short span life as these were superseded by the 1994 Rules which came into effect from October 17, 1994 (Para 4.3 of the Writ Petition) Under the 1978 Rules, a Master degree holder was eligible to be considered for promotion to the higher post of Deputy Director/equivalent posts after rendering four years of regular service in any feeder post whereas, a degree or PG diploma holder became eligible for such promotion after rendering six years of service in a feeder post.

(3.) The further case of the Writ Petitioner is that under the 1978 Rules, the Petitioner and some others became eligible for promotion for the post of Deputy Director which was required to be filled up by way of cent percent promotion and although there were as many as fifteen vacancies, no DPC was held for the purpose. In the meantime, 1993 Rules came into force and thereafter the 1994 Rules also came into force superseding the 1993 Rules. The respondent authority according to the Writ Petitioner filled up as many as seven vacancies in an arbitrary manner on ad hoc basis and when the said ad-hoc appointments were discontinued, a Writ Petition being Civil Rule No. 126/1993 was filed and it was earned on in Writ appeal 101/1995. Vide order dated January 29, 1997 the Division Bench of this Court held that as the vacancies had occurred during the pendency of 1978 Rules, the same shall be filled up in accordance with the above Rules.