10.12.2012 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT<br />

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA:<br />

MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)<br />

AIZAWL BENCH ::: AIZAWL<br />

WRIT PETITION (C) No.73 of 2002<br />

D.D. 9.12.2003<br />

Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.K.Kar<br />

Smt. Lily Vaikhuma ... Petitioner<br />

Vs.<br />

State of Mizoram & Ors. ... Respondents<br />

Promotion:<br />

The petitioner aggrieved by the promotion of her 2 juniors and seniority list of Under Secretaries to<br />

the post of Deputy Secretary – The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed that the claim of<br />

petitioner for promotion will be considered by the appropriate authority for the next available vacancy<br />

of Deputy Secretary giving all consequential benefits excepting claim of back wages.<br />

Held:<br />

Mizoram PSC<br />

On promotion from a junior grade to a higher or senior grade either from the date of promotion<br />

order or from the date of joining, as the case may be, the person so promoted gets encadred in the<br />

post to which she/he is promoted. His/her seniority, subject to rules framed or in force for the time<br />

being will be determined according to the date of joining the new service.<br />

OPERATIVE PORTION OF JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)<br />

6. Coming to the facts of the present case, it is the admitted position that under the relevant rules<br />

in force at the particular point of time the petitioner was lawfully promoted on 7.12.88 to Post of<br />

Under Secretary (vide Annex.-4) and she continued in the said grade notwithstanding the fact that in<br />

the seniority list of the Under Secretaries concerned prepared on 4.9.92, vide notification Memo<br />

No.A 23021/2/80-APT(B), her name was not shown at the relevant place in between the Serial<br />

No.18 & 19, i.e. below Pu K.Rochhinga and above Pu Laltlana J.Pachuau. But on consideration of<br />

her repeated representations the mistake was corrected vide notification dated 11.8.98 vide Memo<br />

No.A.23031/1/97-I AR(GSW) (Annx.-16), wherein she has been shown in Serial No.3 in between<br />

Sl.No.2 Pu K.Rochinga and Sl.No.4 Pu Laltlana J.Pachuau. She is aggrieved by promotion of her<br />

juniors Pu Laltlana J.Pachuau and two others effected vide notification No.A.22012/2/91-<br />

P&AR(GSW) dated 28.8.2001 (Annx.-17). She made representation to vindicate her grievances<br />

but ultimately the relief sought was refused by passing Inter Departmental note vide I.D.No.A 32028/<br />

1/2001-PAR(GSW) dated 18 th March, 2002 and hence this writ petition seeking justice.<br />

781

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!