Jagannath Bhagawati and Others vs State of Assam and Others

Heard the appellants and the respondents.

Appellants are working as receptionist in the tourism department of the state of Assam. There are fourteen persons working as receptionist in the entire state. The posts are created as ex-cadre and the appellants are working since the year 1991-92 without a promotional avenue. The state pay commission considered the grievances of ex-cadre receptionists and directed the government to en-cadre them and give them promotional avenues. The state did not accept the recommendation instead appointed a committee to go into the anomalies. The said committee also endorsed the view of the pay commission and directed that the appellants and the others working in the said posts have to be en-cadred and promotional avenues have to be given. Now that the government did not give effect to the recommendation of the pay anomaly committee a writ petition [7131/2005] was filed by the appellants.

The Commissioner of the tourism department filed an affidavit that the recommendation of the pay commission will be given effect. However the Deputy Director of the tourism department filed objections that the request of the appellants cannot be considered and they will be taken in the ministerial cadre at the level of lower division assistant.

It is said that the next higher post is assistant tourist information officer and the said post will be filled by direct recruitment. The pay-scale of the receptionist is: Rs. 3010-60-3490-90-3850-EB-90-4480-120-5200-175-6075/- and that of the assistant tourist information officer Rs. 3490-90-4490-120-4600-EB-120-5200-175-6600-250-8100/-.

The counsel for the appellant relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Raghunath Prasad Singh Vs. Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Government of Bihar and Others, AIR 1988 SC 1033 : (1989) 58 FLR 21 : (1988) 1 JT 22 : (1988) LabIC 1507 : (1988) 2 LLJ 209 : (1988) 1 SCALE 567 , in para 4 of which the following observations are made.

"4. Before we part with the appeal, we would like to take notice of another aspect. In course of hearing of the appeal, to a query made by us, learned counsel for the appellant indicated the reason as to why the appellant was anxious to switch over to the general cadre. He relied upon two or three communications which are a part of the record where it has been indicated that there is no promotional opportunity available in the wireless organisation. Reasonable promotional opportunities should be available in every wing of public service. That generates efficiency in service and fosters the appropriate attitude to grow for achieving excellence in service. In the absence of promotional prospects, the service is bound to degenerate and stagnation kills the desire to serve properly. We would, therefore, direct the State of Bihar to provide at least two promotional opportunities to the officers of the State Police in the wireless organisation within six months from today by appropriate amendments of rules. In case the State of Bihar fails to comply with this direction, it should, within two months thereafter, give a fresh opportunity to personnel in the police wireless organisation to exercise option to revert to the general cadre and that benefit should be extended to everyone in the wireless organization".

It is seen that there are fourteen persons working in the said posts as ex-cadre. A permanent need for the posts has been felt and yet the government has categorised the said posts as ex-cadre, which appears to be illegal. Ex-cadre post can be created only in exceptional circumstances where posting or promotion is to be given to a person and that post is co-terminus with his retirement. Here (in this case) that is not the situation. It is therefore directed that keeping in view the observations made by the Supreme Court in Raghunath (supra) the government should en-cadre the receptionist posts and also should provide promotional avenues keeping aside some reasonable percentage of posts for promotion and the rest for direct recruitment to the post of assistant tourist information officer.

Accordingly the petition is allowed. The Rules accordingly be amended within six months from the date of this order.