UPENDRA NATH DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. This writ application has been filed for issue of a writ asking the authorities as follows:

(2.) The brief facts are as follows: The petitioner is an employee in the office of the D.C. Barpeta and appointed as LDA on 27.2.84. He was transferred to F&CS Branch on 20.1.85 and had been working till 31.10.90. Thereafter, he was transferred to Foreigners' Tribunal Branch. The petitioner belongs to OBC. As per Rule 11 of Assam Supply Service Rules, 1970 amended and under ASS (amendment) Rule 1989, the vacancies in the post of Sub-Inspector of Supply be filled up by direct recruitment to the extent of seventyfive percent and twentyfive percent from ministerial cadre which includes LDA Acctt. Asstt. etc. working in Director of F&CS and Civil Supply Branches of Districts and Sub-Divisions. Rule 13 (3) of that Rules prescribes procedure for selection. By virtue of Rule 11 (2) of Amended Rule, 1989, the respondent authority issued letters on 26.12.90 and 2.3.91 asking the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta to submit the ACR of the petitioner with an information whether he has completed 5 years continuous service as on 1.1.90, for placing his case before the Selection Committee for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector. By letter dated 22.1.91 the petitioner was asked by the respondents to contact his concerned officers for sending his necessary particulars pertaining to service for the purpose of placing his case before the Selection Committee; The Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta immediately sent all particulars and informations of the petitioner by order dated 18.3.91. But the case of the petitioner was not considered for promotion as there was no outstanding/very good remark in his ACR. The names of respondents 5 to 8 were sent before the selection committee for promotion and although they did not fulfil eligibility criteria by notification dated 3.5.91 they were promoted to the post of Sub- Inspector in F&CS Deptt. Being aggrieved with the promotion of respondents 5 to 8, the petitioner and three others filed a writ petition before this Hon"ble Court being CR' No 2986/91 which is pending for disposal. During pendency of the writ petition the three petitioners in CR No. 2986/91 were promoted vide order dated 29.10.92 to the post of Sub- Inspector, F&CS Deptt. But the name of the petitioner was not sent by Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta for placing the same before the selection committee held on 13,8.92. The petitioner submitted a representation on 6.5.91 to the respondent No.2, which was duly forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta.

(3.) I have heard Mr. A. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. K. Devi, learned Govt. Advocate. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1,2,3 &4 where in paras 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 are admitted. Regarding failure to send the name of the petitioner for placing the same before the selection committee for promotion it is stated that the case of the petitioner was not considered for promotion as there was no outstanding/very good remarks in his ACR. Regarding para 12 of the writ application it is stated that the names of the eligible candidates were called for by the respondent with particulars by letter dtd. 12.2.92, 21.5.92 and 5.5.92 for placing before the selection committee held on 13.8.92 and the petitioners in CR 2986/91 and 15 others were promoted as Sub-Inspector in F&CS Deptt. But the name of the petitioner was not sent by the DC, Barpeta. And as such, his case was not considered. The representation dated 9.5.91 (Annexure-8 to the writ application) is also admitted by the authority and it is further stated that the same was duly forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta. Annexure-8 to the writ application is quoted below: