HEDU K. YEPTHO Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Nuksungtila, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. Wotsa, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5, Mr. Imti Longjem and Ms. Esther, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6 and Mr. Imti Longchar, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents.

(2.) This writ petition is filed by the Association of Mechanical Engineer and its General Secretary. The Association is registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the members of the Association are possessing degree of Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical). It is not in dispute that the member of the Association are qualified and eligible under the Nagaland Engineer Service (Group-A and B) Rules, 2012 (for short, 2012 Rules) for the post of Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO)/Assistant Mechanical Engineer (AME).

(3.) It is relevant to take note of the fact that prior to coming into force of the 2012 Rules, initially, the Nagaland Engineering Service Rules, 1997 (for short, 1997 Rules) and thereafter, the Nagaland Engineering Service Rule, 2006 (Class I and Class II), ( for short, 2006 Rules) were in force. All the aforesaid Rules are applicable to Public Works Department, Public Health Engineering Department and Power Department. 60% of the posts of SDO/AME are to be filled up by direct recruitment from degree holders in the concerned Engineering discipline from a recognized university and 40 % by way of promotion from the feeder post. The private respondents are the promotees and the grievenaces expressed by the petitioners is that while filing up the posts of Sub-Divisional Officer/Assistant Mechanical officer, transgressing into the quota for direct recruitment, promotion had been effected beyond the quota prescribed for the promotees for a period of time commencing from the year 2003 upto 2013. Categorical averments are made that during the aforesaid period, 15 (fifteen) vacancies had arisen in the post of Assistant Mechanical Engineer and 11 (eleven) numbers of promotees had been promoted eating up the quota of direct recruits and only 4(four) direct recruits were appointed, whereas in terms of extant Rules, 9(nine) direct recruits should have been appointed and promotion could have been given only to 6(six) persons. Such categorical assertion made in paragraph-6 of the writ petition is not denied in the affidavit but promotions given to ther promotees beyond the quota earmarked for them is sought to be justified on the ground that unless Junior Engineers were promoted as SDO/AME, Work-charged Mechanical Officer (M.O.) cannot be regularised.