Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

768
Mizoram PSC
of Mizoram having the identical pay scale. According to the Recruitment Rules of 1988, which is
called “the Mizoram Education & Human Resources Department RRS, 1988” the post of Research
Officer (Anthropology) was to be filled by 100% promotion from the feeder post viz. From the
incumbents holding the posts of Research Investigator/Translator/Codifier with not less than 8 years
service in the Grade. The post of District Research Officer Tribal Research Institute was also to be
filled up by promotion from the incumbents holding the posts of Research Investigator/Translator/
Codifier with not less than 8 years service in the Grade. The said Recruitment Rules had been amended
in 1995 under the name and style of “the Mizoram Education & Human Resources Department
(Group ‘B’ Gazetted posts) Recruitment Rules, 1995 and under the amended Rule the posts of district
Research Officer, Research Officer (Anthropology), Special Officer (District Gazetter) are to be filled
up by promotion from the incumbents holding the posts of Research Investigator and Technical Assistant
with not less than 5 years regular service in the Grade, Codifier with not les than 8 years regular
service in the Grade, Translator with not less than 10 years regular service in the Grade.
The petitioner’s further case is that since the petitioner had been holding the post of Codifier and
the private respondent No.4 the post of Research Investigator having identical pay scale, the only
criteria to get consideration for promotion to the higher post would be the qualifying service. In case
of Codifier it is prescribed not less than 8 years, in case of Research Investigator it is prescribed not
less tan 5 years and as such the D.P.C. ought to have considered the case of the petitioner allowing the
preferential treatment since the petitioner was senior to the private respondent No.4 by one year in the
same pay scale and under the same Department. Since both the posts of Research Investigator and
Codifier are included in the feeder posts for the purpose of promotion to the higher posts, the incumbent
holding the feeder post more in length deserves to be allowed preferential treatment and as such,
according to the petitioner, the appointment of the private respondent No.4 to the post of Research
Officer is illegal, violative of the law of equality and liable to be quashed, instead the authority be
directed to promote the petitioner to the post of Research Officer or equivalent post.
3. The Govt. respondent having file the counter resisted the claim of the petitioner on the ground,
inter alia, that the Mizoram Public Service Commission (in short MPSC) did not recommend the name
of the petitioner for the post of Research Officer and as such the appointing authority was not in a
position to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of promotion.
4. The MPSC also furnished a counter contending, inter alia, that it is the settled proposition of
law supported by judicial pronouncement that among the persons in the different feeder posts/Grades,