AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. C. K. S. Baruah, learned State Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5; Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department, for respondent No. 3; Mr. R. M. Deka, learned counsel for respondent No. 6; and Mr. A. R. Tahbildar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 7 to 11.
Challenge made in this writ petition is to the order dated 09.06.2025, passed by the District Commissioner, Nalbari, whereby 6 (six) Junior District Administrative Assistants (in short, “Jr.DAA”) have been promoted to the post of Senior District Administrative Assistant (in short, “Sr.DAA”) under the Rule 6(3)(5) of the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967, on the ground that the said promotion has been made in violation of the provisions of the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978. The petitioner prays for a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider his case for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA with retrospective effect from the date on which the private respondent has been promoted.
The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was initially appointed as a Peon (Grade-IV) in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari, under the Assam Public Services (Appointment of Family Members of Persons Killed by Extremists/Terrorists) Rules, 1992, vide order dated 28.02.2012, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 4608/2010. Subsequently, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 7009/2015 and WP(C) No. 815/2013, the petitioner was appointed to a Grade-III post of Junior Assistant, now redesignated as Jr.DAA, vide order dated 21.07.2018. He joined the said post on 01.08.2018.
A draft gradation list of Grade-III staff under the amalgamated establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari, was published on 16.08.2024, which stated to have been finalized in respect of the posts of Sr.DAA and Jr.DAA, wherein the name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 59. The total sanctioned strength of the cadre of Sr.DAA in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari, is stated to be 41 and the post of Sr.DAA is required to be filled up by way of promotion from the cadre of Jr.DAA.
The petitioner contends that, under Section 4 of the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978, 7% of the posts are reserved for candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category, 10% for Scheduled Tribes (Plains) and 5% for Scheduled Tribes (Hills). As per Section 5 of the said Act, the establishment having vacancy should be filled up by promotion in the same manner by maintaining roster register to that effect. It further provides that every establishment shall maintain such roster register and violation of such provision entails penalty.
According to the petitioner, as per the roster register provided in the Schedule to the aforesaid Act, every 8th, 22nd and 36th posts in the cadre are reserved for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste and so on and so forth. Since the total cadre strength of Sr.DAA in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari, is 41, the petitioner contends that 3 (three) posts in the said cadre are required to be filled up from amongst candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category.
It is further contended that under the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967, as amended in 2015, a Jr.DAA, having completed 4 (four) years of continuous service, is eligible for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. According to the petitioner, notwithstanding the availability of eligible candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category, the District Commissioner, Nalbari, by the impugned order, promoted 6 (six) Jr.DAAs to the post of Sr.DAA without giving due effect to the reservation prescribed for the Scheduled Caste category.
Mr. S. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that out of the 39 employees reflected in the relevant gradation position, Shri Ashok Das and Shri Bubul Kalita, whose names appear at Sl. Nos. 5 and 6 respectively, have subsequently been promoted to the cadre of Supervisory Assistant. Similarly, Shri Gagan Sarma and Shri Homeswar Deka, whose names appear at Sl. Nos. 4 and 8 respectively, have already retired from service. Shri Bhubaneswar Sarma has also retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation, whereas Shri Ramani Malakar has been promoted to the post of Administrative Officer. Thus, altogether 6 (six) vacancies had arisen in the cadre of Sr.DAA. He submits that since 8th sloth in the roster register has fallen vacant, the petitioner, being the eligible Scheduled Caste candidate, is entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA.
Mr. Goswami further submits that as per the roster register provided in the Schedule to the Act of 1978, the 8th, 22nd and 36th roster posts are reserved for candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. Thus, having regard to the total cadre strength of 41 posts in the cadre of Sr.DAA and the statutory reservation of 7% in favour of Scheduled Castes, 3 (three) posts are required to be reserved for the Scheduled Caste category.
He submits that only one Scheduled Caste candidate, namely, Shri Gopal Harijan, whose name appears at Sl. No. 24 in the gradation list, has been promoted to the post of Sr.DAA, whereas, as per the applicable reservation policy and roster, the remaining 2 (two) reserved posts are also required to be filled up by eligible candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. Therefore, non-filling up of the reserved posts and the consequent non-consideration of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA are in violation of the provisions of the Act of 1978. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA by giving due effect to the provisions of the Act of 1978 and the applicable Rules and by following the prescribed reservation policy and roster.
In support of his submission, Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.S. Garg Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., reported in (2006) 6 SCC 430, to project that in the event of any conflict between the percentage of reservation and the roster, the former shall prevail.
Mr. C. K. S. Baruah, learned State Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5, submits that Shri Ashok Kr. Das, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste category, was promoted to the post of District Administrative Supervisory Assistant vide Office Order dated 02.04.2025. Thereafter, Shri Prakash Sutradhar, who also belongs to the Scheduled Caste category, was promoted to the post of Senior District Administrative Assistant vide Office Order dated 09.06.2025.
Learned State Counsel further submits that although Shri Homeswar Deka belongs to the Scheduled Caste category, he was not appointed as Junior Assistant, now re-designated as Jr.DAA, against a post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category. His appointment was made under the establishment vide order dated 10.05.1995. Accordingly, when he was subsequently promoted to the post of Senior Assistant, now re-designated as Sr.DAA, his promotion was made against the Unreserved (UR) category, pursuant to the Minutes dated 08.06.2012, relating to the promotion order issued vide dated 13.07.2025. Consequently, Sri Homeswar Deka was rightly adjusted against Roster Point Sl. No. 21, earmarked for the OBC/MOBC (UR) category, in terms of the roster register prepared in the year 2014. Therefore, he submits that the contention of the petitioner that the reservation roster was not duly followed is misconceived.
Mr. R. M. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6, submits that the respondent No. 6 has been promoted as a general category in the vacant post of Shri Homeswar Deka, who is a Scheduled Caste candidate and promoted on its own merit and has retired on the 21st post in the roster point. Accordingly, respondent No. 6 was promoted against the said vacancy as a general category candidate and not against any post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category. Therefore, he submits that the promotion of respondent No. 6 is in consonance with the applicable reservation policy and the roster maintained by the State and as such, the petitioner cannot claim the post in which the respondent No. 6 has been promoted as the same is not a post reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidate.
In support of his submissions, Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6, has relied on a judgment of Hon’le Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission & Ors., reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785, to project that if the number of Scheduled Caste candidate who by their own merit got selected to open competition vacancies, equals or even exceeds the percentage of posts reserved for SC candidates, it cannot be said that the reservation quota for Scheduled Castes candidates has been filled and the entire reservation quota would be intact and available in addition to those selected under open competition category.
The learned counsel appearing for the other respondents, namely, Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department, and Mr. A. R. Tahbildar, learned counsel appearing for proforma respondent Nos. 7 to 11, have adopted the submissions advanced and the stand taken by Mr. C. K. S. Baruah, learned State Counsel, and Mr. R. M. Deka, learned counsel for respondent No. 6.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.
The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste community who was initially appointed to a Grade-IV post and was thereafter appointed to a Grade-III post of Junior Assistant, now re-designated as Junior DAA, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in the earlier round of writ proceedings. The Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978, inter alia, provides 7% reservation for candidate belonging to Scheduled Castes and the establishment having vacancy should be filled up by promotion by maintaining roster to that effect. In the present case, the roster register maintained in respect of the Grade-III employees under the amalgamated establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari, indicates a cadre strength of 42 posts, of which roster points at Sl. Nos. 8, 22 and 36 are earmarked for candidates belonging to the Scheduled Caste category.
As per the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967, the post of Sr.DAA is to be filled up from amongst the Jr.DAAs having four years of continuous service in the feeder grade, on the basis of seniority-cum-merit.
It is not in dispute that by the impugned promotion order, six Jr.DAAs were promoted to the post of Sr.DAA under Rule 6(3)(5) of the Assam Ministerial District Establishment Service Rules, 1967. However, the material on record indicates that against the cadre strength of 42 posts, only 1 (one) Jr.DAA belonging to the Scheduled Caste category has been promoted to the post of Sr.DAA, whereas 3 (three) posts in the cadre are earmarked for the Scheduled Caste category under the applicable roster.
As regards the respondent No. 6, it is noticed that she has been promoted in the 21st sloth/post reserved for OBC/MOBC and not to the post reserved for Scheduled Caste category. The said vacancy arose upon the retirement of Shri Homeswar Deka, who, though belonging to the Scheduled Caste category, had not been appointed against a post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category and, as stated by the respondents, had subsequently been promoted on his own merit against an unreserved post. Therefore, the mere fact that the post occupied by respondent No. 6 had earlier been held by a Scheduled Caste candidate cannot be said to be a post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category. In other words, the promotion of respondent No. 6 cannot be said to have been made against a post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category.
On perusal of the authorities relied on by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the law laid down in the said authorities are well settled propositions of law which require no consideration as the same are not relevant at all in the facts and circumstances of the present lis.
In the conspectus above, this Court finds that the respondent authorities have not followed the reservation policy as provided under the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978, and the roster register maintained to that effect, as only 1 (one) candidate from Scheduled Caste appears to have been promoted out of 42 cadre strength, whereas 3 (three) posts are reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate. The petitioner, being a senior-most Scheduled Caste candidate in the grade of Junior DAA and is eligible in terms of the recruitment rules, was required to have his case considered in accordance with the applicable reservation policy and roster.
In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Sr.DAA in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Rules, the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978, and the roster maintained thereof.
Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Senior DAA with effect from 09.06.2025 in accordance with law and the applicable reservation roster and to pass appropriate orders thereon. In the event the petitioner is found entitled to such promotion, the consequential benefits shall also be extended to him in accordance with law.
The exercise, as directed hereinabove, shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, but not later than the outer limit of 3 (three) months from today.
With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.