Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2518/2016 on 11 February, 2025
Page No.# 1/14
GAHC010110522016
2025:GAU-AS:1361-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
WP(C) NO.2518 OF 2016
The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the
Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances
& Pension, Department of Personnel & Training, North Block,
New Delhi- 110001.
......Petitioner
-Versus-
1. Md. Sohrab Ali, IAS,
S/o- Late Hamed Ali, presently working as Secretary to the
Government of Assam, Education Department, Quarter NO.10/1,
Type-IV, Dispur Capital complex, Guwahati-781006, in the
District of Kamrup (Metro), Assam.
2. Sri Preetom Saikia, IAS,
S/o- Late Kamini Kanta Saikia, presently working as Deputy
Commissioner, Goalpara, House No.01, Nilgiri Lane,
Baghorbari, Panjabari, Guwahati-810037, in the District of
Kamrup (Metro), Assam.
3. Sri Anupam Kumar Roy, IAS,
S/o- M.R. Roy, presently working as Secretary to the
Government of Assam, GAD Department, House No.06,
Chandra Choudhury Path, Bhetapara, P.O. Beltola, Guwahati-
281028, in the District of Kamrup (Metro), Assam.
4. Sri Dilip Borthakur, IAS,
S/o- Late Purna Chandra Borthakur, presently working as Deputy
Commissioner, DimaHasao, Haflong, Gandhi Basti, Bye Lane
No.01, P.O. Silpukhuri, Guwahati/781003, in the District of
Kamrup (Metro), Assam.
Page No.# 2/14
5. Smt. Nilufer Alam Hazarika,
W/o Mr. Absar Hazarika, presently working as Member of Board
of Revenue and Secretary of Food and Civil Supplies, Resident
of 4th By Lane North, House No.3, Guwahati, Kamrup, Assam.
6. Dr. Anowaruddin Choudhury, IAS,
S/o Late Alauddin Choudhary, Resident of House No.7, Islam
Road, Guwahati-7, Kamrup (M), Assam.
7. Shri Dhurbajlyoti Hazarika, IAS,
S/o Late J. Hazarika, Resident of House No.84, Hengerabari,
Lisubagan Road, Guwahati-36, Kamrup (M), Assam.
8. Shri Ahmed Hussain, IAS,
S/o Late Riazul Haque, Resident of Hatigaon, Behtapara PWD
Road, Jimil Path, Near RCC Bridge, PS- Hatigaon, Dispur,
Guwahati-6, Kamrup (M), Assam.
9. Shri Dipak Kumar Sarma, IAS,
S/o Late Khila Kanta Sarma, Resident of Housefed Apartment,
GS Road, Rukminigaon, PO- Khanapara, Guwahati-22, Kamrup
(M), Assam.
10. Shri Chohan Doley, IAS,
S/o Late Lakshya Nath Doley, Resident of Borbari Magazine
Tiniali, Pubanchal Path, House No.7, Guwahati-36, Kamrup (M),
Assam.
11. Imdadul Haque, IAS,
Resident of Hatigaon, Beltola Sanjogi Path, PS- Hatigaon,
Dispur, Guwahati-36, Kamrup (M), Assam.
12. Simanta Thakuria, IAS,
S/o Late Chandra Kanta Thakuria, Resident of Gulmohar
Apartment, Rukmini Beltola Path, Rukminigaon, PO-
Khanapara, Guwahati-22, Kamrup (M), Assam.
13. Shri Mukti Gogoi, IAS,
S/o Late Debeswar Gogoi, Resident of Nifty Enclave, Flat No.4-
A, Sewali Path, Hatigaon, Guwahati-22, Kamrup (M), Assam.
14. Shri Amlan Baruah, IAS,
S/o Late Ramananda Baruah, Resident of House No.25, Srinigar,
PO- Dispur, Guwahati-5, Kamrup (M), Assam.
Page No.# 3/14
15. Harendar Kr. Dev Mahanta, IAS,
S/o Late Mahendar Ch. Dev Mahanta, Resident of House No.18,
South Bye Lane 2, Juripar, Sewali Path, Hatigaon, Guwahati-38,
Kamrup (M), Assam.
16. Dr. Upendra Nath Bora, IAS,
S/o Late Ladheswar Bora, Resident of Housefed Bora, GS Road,
Rukminigaon, PO- Khanapara, Guwahati-22, Kamrup (M),
Assam.
17. Shri Simanta Thakuria, IAS,
S/o Late Chandra Kanta Thakuria, Resident of Gulmohar
Apartment, Rukmini Beltola Path, Rukminigaon, PO-
Khanapara, Guwahati-22, Kamrup (M), Assam.
18. Harendar Kr. Dev Mahanta, IAS,
S/o Late Mahendar Ch. Dev Mahanta, Resident of House No.18,
South Bye Lane.2, Juripar, Sewali Path, Hatigaon, Guwahati-38,
Kamrup (M), Assam.
19. Shri Mukti Gogoi, IAS,
S/o Late Debeswar Gogoi, Resident of Nifty Enclave, Flat No.4-
A, Sewali Path, Hatigaon, Guwahati-22, Kamrup (M), Assam.
20. The name of the respondent No.20 was struck off from the
array of respondents vide order dated 19.01.2023
21. Shri Amlan Baruah, IAS,
S/o Late Ramananda Baruah, Resident of House No.25, Srinigar,
PO-Dispur, Guwahati-5, Kamrup (M), Assam.
22. Shri Ramesh Chand Jain, IAS,
S/o Late Sohanlal Jain, Resident of Devdaru Path, Guwahati-22,
Dispur, Kamrup, Assam.
23. Smt. Larlyne Ingtipi, IAS,
D/o Basa Ingitipi Kathan, Resident of 24 TrinitasNilgiri Lane,
Baghoribori, Panjabari, Guwahati-37, Kamrup, Assam.
24. Shri Tapan Chandra Goswami, IAS, S/o Late Madhab
Chandra Goswami, Resident of Bharalumukh, Guwahati,
Kamrup, Assam.
25. Nafifa Ahmed,
W/o Zakir Hussain, Resident of Flat No.4B, Mandakini
Page No.# 4/14
Apartment, Beltola Survey, Guwahati-28, Guwahati, Kamrup
(M), Assam.
....Respondents
26. Union of India, Secretary to the Government of India,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances, and Pensions,
Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi-
110001.
27. The Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur
House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-110009
28. The Chief Secretary, Government of Assam, Dispur,
Guwahati-810006
29. The Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam,
Personnel (A) Department, Assam Secretariat, Dispur, Guwahati-
781006.
......Proforma Respondents
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, Deputy Solicitor General of India.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Khan, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Date of Hearing : 27.01.2025.
Date of Judgment : 11.02.2025.
JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)
(Kaushik Goswami, J)
Heard Mr. R.K.D Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of
India for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel appearing for
the respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Page No.# 5/14
2. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India assailing the judgment & order dated 19.12.2014 passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, (hereinafter to be referred as
"Tribunal") in Original Application Nos.124/12, 199/2013, 310/2013, 344/2013,
345/2013, 346/2013, 347/2013, 348/2013, 040/000027/2014, and
040/000092/2014, whereby the respondent authorities (writ petitioner herein)
were directed to assign the correct seniority to the private respondents herein.
3. The brief facts of the present case are that the private respondents
were initially recruited as Junior Grade to the Assam Civil Service (Class-I) on
01.06.1983 and as such, they were eligible for promotion to the cadre of IAS.
However, the Government of India, by communications dated 21.06.2007 and
03.06.2008, has determined 8 vacancies for the year 2007 and 7 vacancies for
the year 2008 for promotion to the Assam segment of the IAS, Assam-
Meghalaya Joint Cadre from amongst the members of the State Civil Service. In
fact, no select list was prepared in the year 2007. Thereafter, the Government of
Assam, by communication dated 08.08.2008, recommended and submitted a
proposal for preparation of Select List to the respondent No.2 (before the
Tribunal), i.e. UPSC, for preparation of select list for the year 2007-2008 and the
name of the private respondents were forwarded for consideration against the
vacancies for the year 2008.
4. On 27.02.2009, select list for the year 2007 and 2008 were notified,
wherein the names of the private respondents appeared against the vacancies
shown for the year 2008. Subsequently, the Government of India, on
10.08.2009, assigned the year of allotment on the basis of UPSC approved
Select List for the year 2007 and 2008. Thereafter, the private respondents, by
Page No.# 6/14
notification dated 15.10.2009, were appointed to the Junior Administrative
Grade of the IAS w.e.f. 01.01.2009.
5. The private respondents being aggrieved by the assignment of the
year of allotment, individually made their representations and the same being
unattended, they filed an application before the Tribunal, which was registered
and numbered as O.A. No.124/2012, wherein the Tribunal, by order dated
09.11.2012, was pleased to dispose of the said application by directing the
respondent authorities (petitioner herein) to assign the correct seniority to the
private respondents (applicants before the Tribunal).
6. Against the said order, the writ petitioner, i.e. the Union of India,
represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of
Personnel and Training, filed a writ petition before this Court, which was
registered and numbered as WP(C) No.1670/2014, wherein this Court, by order
dated 26.03.2014, after observing that the direction passed by the Tribunal by
the order impugned was admittedly passed without giving opportunity to the
Government of India to file counter-affidavit, remanded the matter back to the
Tribunal to hear the matter after giving opportunity to the writ petitioner to file
their counter-affidavit.
7. On remand, the matter was heard by the Tribunal. After the written
statements were filed by the writ petitioner, the Tribunal, by judgment & order
dated 19.12.2014, was pleased to dispose of the said application by directing
the writ petitioners herein to assign the correct seniority to the private
respondents. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment & order, the present writ
petition has been filed by the writ petitioner.
Page No.# 7/14
8. Mr. R.K.D Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India
appearing for the writ petitioner submits that in the case of Parveen Kumar
Vs. Union Public Service Commission, reported in 2010 0 Supreme (P&H)
746, decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Court , the basic issue was that
eligibility of State Civil Service Officers for the purpose of consideration for
promotion to IAS should be reckoned as on the 1st January of the year in which
those vacancies arose against which the Select List was prepared and that
earlier the same was being considered on the 1 st January of the year
subsequent to the year of occurrence of the vacancies in question. He further
submits that the same was allowed by Punjab and Haryana High Court by order
dated 01.02.2010 and against the aforesaid order, the writ petitioner had
preferred an SLP before the Apex Court, which was dismissed vide order dated
31.05.2010. He further submits that in the said order, the Punjab and Haryana
High Court had also observed that the select list should be styled coinciding with
the year of the occurrence of the vacancies. He further submits that after
dismissal of the SLP by the Apex Court, the order of the Punjab and Haryana
High Court was implemented. He further submits that in the matter before the
Punjab and Haryana High Court, the issue of fixation of seniority was not raised.
Mr. Choudhury accordingly submits that in consultation with the
other Cadre Controlling Authorities, viz. Ministry of Home Affairs/Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Union Public Service Commission, Department of
Legal Affairs and various State Governments, this department carried out an
amendment in the IAS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987 vide Notification
dated 18.04.2012 so that one additional year in the matter of year of allotment
does not accrue to the promotee IAS Officers appointed on the basis of the
Select List prepared following the ratio laid down in Parveen Kumar (supra)
Page No.# 8/14
case. He further submits that the said amendment is applied in the given facts
and circumstances of the case and as such, the order of the Tribunal warrants
interference from this Court.
9. Per contra, Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that the Select List, on the basis of which the
private respondents have been appointed to the IAS, should be styled coinciding
with the year of occurrence of vacancies for which it was prepared. He further
submits that the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of
Parveen Kumar (supra) applies to the case in hand insofar as styling of the
Select List is concerned. He further submits that weightage of qualifying service
for the purpose of fixation of seniority/year of allotment in IAS should be
computed on the basis of IAS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987 which was in
force during the time when the private respondents were appointed to IAS. He
accordingly submits that the amended seniority list notified on 18.04.2012 is not
applicable to the case of the private respondents. He further submits that the
private respondents should be given benefit of the Assam Civil Services (Class-I)
Amendment Rules, 1989, which provides that irrespective of the date of joining
in the State Civil Service, the officer will be deemed to have joined as on 1 st
January of the year.
10. We have given our prudent consideration to the arguments
advanced by the learned counsel for the contesting parties and have perused
the material available on record. We have also considered the case laws cited at
the bar.
11. The issue arising in this writ petition is primarily the assignment of
year of allotment in respect of the private respondents.
Page No.# 9/14
12. Apt at the outset to refer to the relevant Rules of the Indian
Administrative Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987 (hereinafter to be
referred as "Rules, 1987"). Rule 3 of the said Rules is reproduced hereunder for
ready reference:
"3. Assignment of year of allotment:-
(1) Every officer shall be assigned a year of allotment in accordance with the
provisions hereinafter contained in these rules.
(2) The year of allotment of an officer in Service at the commencement of
these rules shall be the same as has been assigned to him or may be
assigned to him by the Central Government in accordance with the orders
and instructions in force immediately before the commencement of these
rules.
(3) The year of allotment of an officer appointed to the Service after the
commencement of these rules shall be as follows:-
(i) the year of allotment of a direct recruit officer shall be the year
following the year in which the competitive examination was held:
Provided that if a direct recruit officer is permitted to join
probationary training under rule 5(1) of the IAS (Probation) Rules,
1954, with direct recruit officers of a subsequent year of allotment,
then he shall be assigned that subsequent year as the year of
allotment.
(ii) The year of allotment of a promotee officer shall be determined
with reference to the year for which the meeting of the Committee to
make selection, to prepare the select list on the basis of which he
was appointed to the Service, was held and with regard to the
continuous service rendered by him in the State Civil Service not
below the rank of a Deputy Collector or equivalent, up to the 31 day
of December of the year immediately before the year for which
meeting of the Committee to make selection was held to prepare the
select list on the basis of which he was appointed to the Service, in
the following manner:-
a. for the service rendered by him upto twenty one years, he shall be
given a weightage of one year for every completed three years of
service, subject to a minimum of four years;
Page No.# 10/14
b. he shall also be given a weightage of one year for every completed
two years of service beyond the period of twenty one years, referred
to in sub-clause (a) subject to a maximum of three years.
Explanation- For the purpose of calculation of the weightage under this
clause, the fractions, if any, are to be ignored:
Provided that he shall not be assigned a year of allotment earlier than the
year of allotment assigned to an officer senior to him in that select list or
appointed to the service on the basis of an earlier select list:
(iii) the year of allotment of an officer appointed by selection shall be
determined with reference to the year for which the meeting of the
Committee to make the selection to prepare the select list, on the basis of
which he was appointed to the Service, was held and with regard to the
continuous service rendered by him in a post equivalent to the post of
Deputy Collector or a higher post, up to the 31 December of the year
immediately before the year for which the meeting of the Committee to make
the selection was held to prepare the select list on the basis of which he was
appointed to the service, in the following manner:-
(a) for the service rendered by him up to twenty one years, he shall be given
a weightage of one year for every completed three years of service, subject
to a minimum of four years;
(b) he shall also be given a weightage of one year for every completed two
years of service beyond the period of twenty one years, referred to in sub-
clause (a). subject to a maximum of three years.
Explanation- For the purpose of calculation of the weightage under this
clause, the fractions, if any, shall be ignored:
Provided that he shall not be assigned a year of allotment earlier than the
year of allotment assigned to an officer senior to him in that select list or
appointed to the Service on the basis of an earlier select list:
Provided further that he shall not be allotted a year earlier than the year of
allotment assigned to an officer already appointed to the service in
accordance with sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the recruitment rules, whose length
of Class I continuous service in the State Civil Service is equal to or more
than the length of Class I continuous service of the former in connection with
the affairs of the State.
Explanation-The length of the relevant Class I continuous service in either
case shall be with reference to the 31st day of December of the year
Page No.# 11/14
immediately before the year for which the meeting of the Committee to make
selection was held to prepare the select list on the basis of which
appointments were made in the respective cases."
13. Perusal of the aforesaid Rule, it appears that Rule 3(3)(ii) of the said
Rules provides that the year(s) of allotment of promotion to the promotee
officers shall be determined with reference to the year(s) for which meeting of
the Committee to make selection to prepare the Select List, on the basis of
which he was appointed to the service, was held and the year signifies the year
of Select List and that it cannot be construed to mean the year in which the
committee meeting was held. It further appears that for the service rendered up
to 21 years, the private respondents will get weightage of 1 year for every
completed 3 years of service up to 31 st December of the year and beyond 21
years the private respondents will get weightage of 1 year for every completed
2 years of service. The explanation provided in the said Rules clarifies that for
the purpose of calculation of weightage, the fractions, if any, are to be ignored.
However, it further appears that an officer will not get year of allotment earlier
than the year of allotment assigned to his senior.
14. As regards the contention of the writ petitioner on the applicability of
the amended Rules, 2012, this Court is of the view that the same shall not be
applicable in the facts of the present case as the amendment came into force on
18.04.2012 and the same is prospective.
15. Apt also to refer to Rule 2 of the Assam Civil Services (Class-I)
Amendment Rules, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as "Rules, 1989"), which is
reproduced hereunder for ready reference:
"2. Amendment to rule 25- In the said Rules, for sub-rule (1) of rule 25, the
following shall be substituted, namely:
Page No.# 12/14
(1) A member of the service in the Junior grade time scale shall be eligible
for promotion to the Senior grade time scale on entering seventh year of
service in the Junior grade, counted from the year of recruitment of the
members in the Junior grade but the member of the service shall be so
promoted unless the Governor is satisfied about his ability, integrity and
character.
Explanation: - The year of recruitment of members in the Junior grade shall
be taken as one year for the purpose of calculating the period of seven
years."
16. Perusal of the aforesaid Rule indicates that as per explanation
provided therein, the year of allotment of the members in the Junior Grade shall
be taken as 1 year for the purpose of calculating the period of 7 years.
17. It appears that the Tribunal, by keeping the aforesaid provisions in
mind, has disposed of the application. Relevant portion of the order passed by
the Tribunal is extracted hereunder for ready reference:
"30. From a perusal of the aforesaid rule, it is abundantly clear that
the year of allotment of promotee officer shall be determined with reference
to the year for which meeting of the committee to make selection, to prepare
the select list on the basis of which he was appointed to the Service, was
held. In this context it may be noted that the year signifies the year of select
list. It cannot be construed to mean the year in which the committee was
held.
31. The next issue relates to weightage which is to be given to the
applicants for determining the year of allotment. It is stipulated in the Rules
that service of the officer will be reckoned with regard to the continuous
service rendered in the State Civil Service not below the rank of Deputy
Collector or equivalent up to 31st December of the year immediately before
the year for which the meeting of the committee to make selection was held
to prepare the select list on the basis of which he was appointed to the
Service. The manner for reckoning the weightage is also prescribed in the
Rule. For the service rendered up to twenty one years applicants will get
weightage of one year for every completed three years of service up to 31st
December of the year. Beyond twenty one years applicants will get
Page No.# 13/14
weightage of one year for every completed two years of service. For the
purpose of calculation of the weightage the factions, if any, are to be ignored
as per explanation incorporated in Rule 3 (3) (ii) of IAS (Regulation of
Seniority) Rules, 1987, However, an exception is carved out in this rule in
the form of proviso wherein it is stipulated that an officer will not get year of
allotment earlier than the year of allotment assigned to his senior.
32. We have noted that the IAS (Regulations of Seniority)
Amendment Rules, 2012 issued vide notification dated 18.04.2012 are not
applicable to the present applicants inasmuch as the applicants are not
covered under these amendments in view of the fact that the said
amendment did not have retrospective effect and came into force on the date
of publication in the Official Gazette i.e. 18.04.2012.
33. As per explanation to Rule 2 of the Assam Civil Service (Class-1)
(Amendment) Rules, 1989, the year of recruitment of the members in the
Junior grade shall be taken as one year for the purpose of calculating the
period of seven years. As such, whatever be the fraction in the initial year,
that will be treated as a period of one year. The applicants were recruited in
the year (1983 i.e. 01.06 1983 and as such, year 1983 is to be treated as
one complete year and considering the Select List of 2008 as the Select List
of 2007 it can be said that applicants had rendered 25 years of service till
31.12 2007 holding the rank of Deputy Collector or equivalent. Therefore, as
per the procedure prescribed under Sub-Rule (3) (ii) a & b of Rule 3 of the IAS
(Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987, weightage shall be given to the
applicants for 7+2 years =9 years. Ex-consequenti, year of allotment will be
year 2007-9 years = year 1998. But the seniority will be determined subject
to the prescription laid down under proviso to Sub-Rule (3) (ii) of Rule 3. It
would be necessary to see which year of allotment is assigned to the officer
immediately senior to the applicants. The applicants will not get the year of
allotment earlier than the year of allotment assigned to their senior.
34. Therefore, we direct the respondent authorities to assign the
correct seniority to the applicants accordingly having regard to the
prescription of proviso of Rule 3 (3) (ii) of the IAS (Regulation of Seniority)
Rules, 1987."
18. Perusal of the aforesaid order, it appears that the view taken by the
Tribunal is a plausible view and the direction issued thereof appears to be
reasonable and there is no legal infirmity whatsoever. Hence, the writ petition
Page No.# 14/14
lacks merit. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the judgment &
order passed by the Tribunal warrants no interference from this Court in
exercise of our extra-ordinary jurisdiction. Resultantly, the writ petition stands
dismissed.
No order as to costs.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
