JAYANTA DEV SARMA Vs. MANOJ KUMAR BARUAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.S. Dey, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K.H. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. B.D. Goswami and Ms. B. Choudhury, learned counsel representing respondent No. 1. Mr. B.N. Sarma, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) This intra-court appeal is directed against the common judgment and order dated 24-07-2015 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the two writ petitions, viz. W.P.(C) No. 4312/2011 and W.P.(C) No. 5380/2012 filed by the respondent No. 1.

(3.) The core controversy in this proceeding relates to the competing claims made by the writ appellant and the respondent No. 1 seeking promotion to the post of Officer-in-Charge, Handloom Research and Designing Centre (HRDC) under the Handloom, Textile and Sericulture, Department, Government of Assam. The appellant was working as Textile Chemist where as the respondent No. 1 was working as Research Officer under the department of Handloom and Textile, Assam and both of them were eligible for being considered for promotion to the next higher post of Officer-in-Charge, HRDC. The department has not framed any service rules under of Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the conditions of service of the employees of the department is governed by the Assam Handloom Textiles (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Orders, 1988 (herein after referred to as "Orders of 1988") which came to be notified on 04-09-1988. Clause 8 of the Orders of 1988 lays down the procedure of promotion to the higher posts in the department. As per the requirement of the Service Order, the department had constituted a Selection Committee which had met on 30-07-2011 and after considering the candidature of both the candidates, made a recommendation in favour of the appellant for promotion to the next higher post of Officer-in-Charge HRDC and the consequential order of promotion was issued by the Principal Secretary of the department on 12-08-2011. The recommendation of the Selection Committee dated 30-07-2011 had been put to challenge in W.P.(C) No. 4312/2011 filed by the respondent No. 1 whereas the consequential order of promotion dated 12-08-2011 was challenged by him by filing the subsequent writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 5380/2012. By the impugned judgment and order dated 24-07-2015, the learned Single Judge had disposed of both the writ petitions with a direction upon the department to reconsider the candidature of both the candidates for promotion in the light of observation made there-in. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24-07-2015, the selected candidate has preferred the present appeal.