C. LALTHAZUALA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel representing the petitioner as well as Mr. Aldrin Lallawmzuala, learned counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Also heard Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel representing the respondent No. 3. The petitioner has been in employment since 25.07.2006 as Inspector of Tax, Taxation Department, Government of Mizoram. The said post is a Group 'B' Gazetted post. The petitioner is aggrieved of his stagnation in service and inaction on the part of the respondents in denying career advancement to the Junior Grade Service. Reference is made to the Mizoram Civil Service Rules, 2000 as well as the Amendment brought about vide Notification dated 21.01.2002, more particularly to Rule 8 thereof. As per the said Mizoram Civil Service (Amendment) Rules, 2002, recruitment to the service in the Junior Grade is permitted by following two methods - (1) by direct recruitment through competitive examination conducted by the Commission and confined to 2/3 rd of the vacancies, and (2) by selection from amongst Officers who hold Gazetted post in a substantive capacity, confining it to 1/3rd of the vacancies. In so far as appointment by selection is concerned, the minimum years of service for both Gazetted and Non -Gazetted Officers, the same are indicated therein.

(2.) The said Rules had undergone further amendment by means of the Mizoram Civil Service (Amendment) Rules, 2012, vide Notification dated 21.03.2013. However, in terms of the said Notification the same was given effect to from the date of publication in the Mizoram Gazette i.e. 28.03.2013. In terms of the said Amendment of 2012 promotional prospects for Group 'B' Gazetted Officers have been taken out. 20% of the total sanctioned posts were kept open for being filled up by selection from amongst the Officers holding Group 'A' posts.

(3.) Be that as it may, the petitioner is aggrieved of the letter dated 16.01.2015, issued under the hand of the Under Secretary to the Government of Mizoram in the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, (Civil Service Wing) whereby a decision had been taken to fill up 10 vacancies in the Junior Grade of Mizoram Civil Service during the year 2015 -2016 by direct recruitment through competitive examination. The petitioner's contention is that the respondents before initiating the exercise for filling up the said 10 vacancies, the vacancies as obtaining prior to the Amendment should be filled up according to the then prevalent Rules i.e. Mizoram Civil Service (Amendment) Rules 2002. The primary point urged by the petitioner is that the vacancies which had occurred prior to Amendment of the Rules be governed by the old Rules and as such they are required to be filled up as per the old Rules.