WP(C)/2245/2020
2025 Latest Caselaw 1641 Gua

Gauhati High Court

WP(C)/2245/2020 on 31 July, 2025

GAHC010075302020




                                                2025:GAU-AS:9842

                 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
 (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                    WP(C) NO. 2245 OF 2020
                    Abdur Rahman,
                    Son of Late Abid Ali,
                    Aged about 61 years,
                    Permanent resident of Ward No. 2,
                    Mangaldai, P.O. Mangaldai,
                    District: Darrang, Assam,
                    PIN-784125.

                                                ........Petitioner
                              -Versus-

                    1. The State of Assam, represented by the
                       Commissioner and Secretary to the
                       Government of Assam,
                       General Administrative Department,
                       Dispur, Guwahati-781006.

                    2. The Divisional Commissioner,
                       North Assam Division,
                       Tezpur, Sonitpur-784001.

                    3. The Deputy Commissioner,
                       Darrang & Chairman, Selection Committee,
                       Mangaldai, Darrang-784125.

                    4. The Deputy Commissioner,
                       Darrang, Mangaldai,
                       Darrang-784125.

                                             ........Respondents
                                                        Page 1 of 7
                             -BEFORE-

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

For the Petitioner     : Mr. M. Sarma, Advocate.
                         Mr. P. Bharadwaj, Advocate.
                         Mr. A. Barkataki, Advocate.
                         Mr. T.N. Srinivasan, Advocate.
For the Respondents    : Mr. T.C. Chutia, Addl. Sr. GA, Assam.


Date of Hearing        : 31.07.2025.

Date of Judgment       : 31.07.2025.


                  JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate for the State respondent Nos. 2 to 4. None appears for the respondent No. 1 on call.

2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking direction more specifically from the respondent No. 2, i.e., the Divisional Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur, to act on the recommendation made by the duly constituted Selection Committee in its meeting held on 29.11.2019 and notionally appoint the petitioner thereof to the advertised post of Sadar Head Assistant in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang, Mangaldai.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner was selected and appointed as Lower Division Assistant (Junior Assistant) by Order dated 09.03.1983 and accordingly joined the said post in the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Mangaldai. Thereafter, the petitioner, upon passing the Departmental Examination Training in Accounts and Financial Procedure from the Central Training Institute, the services of the petitioner as L.D.A. (Junior Assistant) was confirmed by Order dated 10.06.1996 issued by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Mangaldai. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant by Order dated 24.12.2004 and accordingly, he joined the promotional post on 27.04.2004. Thereafter, on 20.06.2015, an advertisement was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang, for filling up the only vacant post of Sadar Head Assistant in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang. Thereafter, though the case of the petitioner was considered and the Selection Committee in its meeting held on 29.11.2019, recommended the name of the selected candidates for promotion to the subject post. It is the specific case of the petitioner that though the name of the petitioner was at Sl.No. 1 in the said list of the Selection Committee's recommendation, however, on the very next date, i.e., 30.11.2019, the petitioner upon being superannuated, the promotion was not affected. Situated thus, the present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondent authorities to give effect to the subject recommendation of the Selection Committee and thereby,

notionally promote the petitioner to the subject post with consequential financial benefits including revised pay and pension benefits.

4. Mr. M. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the name of the petitioner was recommended for promotion, therefore, a right has been occurred in his favour and accordingly, the notional promotional benefits cannot be deprived.

5. Per contra, Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate for the State respondent Nos. 2 to 4 submits that since the recommendation of the petitioner for promotion to the subject post was only by way of the minutes of the recommendation and has not come into effect, therefore, no legal right whatsoever arises in favour of the petitioner. He therefore submits that the instant writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed at the threshold. He further submits that in any case, the Selection Committee has not been duly constituted, inasmuch as, it is mandatory that there should have been 4 (four) members, however, the recommendation of the Selection Committee as relied by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is only made by 2 (two) members. He accordingly submits that the same is in violation of the applicable Rule.

6. I have given my prudent consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the contending parties and have perused the materials available on record.

7. It is an admitted position that the recommendation made by the Selection Committee for appointment of Sadar Head Assistant, whereby the petitioner's name was at Sl. No. 1, has not been given effect to, inasmuch as, the petitioner superannuated on the very next date after the aforesaid recommendation.

8. Apt to reproduce the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee, which reads as hereunder:-

"GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER: DARRANG:

MANGALDAI

MINUTES OF THE MEETING ON APPOINTMENT OF SADAR HEAD ASSISTANT, DC'S OFFICE, DARRANG HELD IN THE OFFICE CHAMBER OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DARRANG ON 29.11.2019 AT 2-30 PM,

Officers present:

1. Shri Ghanshyam Dass, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, Darrang.

2. Smti Kalpana Deka, Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Darrang.

Shri Ghanshyam Dass, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, Darrang presided over the meeting.

The Addl. DC (P), Darrang placed the records of following 3 (three) candidates for the post of Sadar Head Assistant, DC's office, Darrang as per advertisement No.DPN.31/2008/123 dt 20.6.2015.

1. Md. Abdur Rahman, Supervisory Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

2. Shri Babul Chandra Saikia, Supervisory Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

3. Shri Hari Chandra Baruah, Senior Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

After scrutiny of service records and discussion on the matter, the meeting decided to recommend names of candidates on merit cum seniority basis as below.

4. Md. Abdur Rahman, Supervisory Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

5. Shri Babul Chandra Saikia, Supervisory Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

6. Shri Hari Chandra Baruah, Senior Assistant, DC's office, Darrang.

The meeting ended with vote of thanks from the Chair.

Sd/-Ghanshyam Dass, IAS

Deputy Commissioner, Darrang & Chairman, Selection Committee, Mangaldai"

9. It is well settled law that promotion only becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post and not on the date of occurrence of the vacancy or the date of recommendation. Reference in this regard is made to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Government of West Bengal & Ors. Vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi & Ors. in Civil Appeal Diary No. 43488/2023, wherein the Apex Court has held as hereunder:-

"21. While we recognize respondent No.1's right to be considered for promotion, which is a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India, he does not hold an absolute right to the promotion itself. The legal precedents discussed above establish that promotion only becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post and not on the date of occurrence of the vacancy or the date of recommendation. Considering that respondent No. 1 superannuated before his promotion was effectuated, he is not entitled to retrospective financial

benefits associated to the promotional post of Chief Scientific Officer, as he did not serve in that capacity."

10. In the instant case, the petitioner having been superannuated on the very next date upon being recommended by the Selection Committee for promotion to the subject post of Sadar Head Assistant, no vested right for promotion arises and therefore, in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court, this Court finds no merit in the instant writ petition.

11. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.

12. It is needless to be clarified that since the writ petition has been decided on the issue of maintainability, this Court did not have an occasion to test the impugned recommendation of the Selection Committee on merit.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant