SHILLONG, India, April 14 -- Meghalaya High Court issued the following judgment/order on March 12:
1. The petitioners who are presently serving as Sub-Divisional Officers/Assistant Engineers (Civil) in the PHE Department of the Government of Meghalaya by way of the instant writ petition are seeking rectification of the gradation list dated 14.02.2024, to show them senior to the respondents Nos. 4 & 5. The ground on which the rectification is sought is that the petitioners except for the petitioner No. 1, who is higher in the merit list than the respondent No. 5, but all lower in the merit list to the respondent No. 4, has been shown lower in the gradation list in spite of being appointed earlier than the said respondents. The relevant dates being as follows:-
i) Petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 12.01.2007
ii) Petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 20.12.2006
iii) Petitioner No. 3 was appointed on 22.12.2006
iv) Petitioner No. 4 was appointed on 13.12.2006
v) Respondent No. 4 was appointed on 03.05.2007
vi) Respondent No. 5 was appointed on 15.05.2008
2. Mr. A.S. Siddiqui, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. A. Kharmyndai, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners along with the other candidates had applied for the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Public Health Engineering Department and were part of the 22(Twenty-two) successful candidates recommended for appointment against 19(Nineteen) posts. The petitioners by virtue of the Reservation Policy, were then appointed against the said posts before the respondents Nos. 4 & 5. However, he submits in the inter se seniority list published by the respondent No. 2, dated 05.05.2021, the name of the respondent No. 4 was reflected at Sl. No. 16, which is above the petitioner No. 1 at Sl. No. 17, and the name of respondent No. 5 was reflected at Sl. No. 18, above the name of the respondents, Nos. 2, 3 & 4, who were shown at Sl. Nos. 19, 20 & 21, though they were appointed subsequently. Being aggrieved, the petitioners he submits, had preferred a representation on 11.03.2022 enclosing the Judgment and Order of this Court dated 10.02.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 301/2018 and other connected matters, wherein it was held that subsequently inducted employees, would not stand on the same footing as candidates appointed earlier though they may be higher in the merit list.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=bzPoyUlszYLCUcCpirIpqKfloLjeG3Rt0rnSf2I80ALCiNookVYQWaaft%2FTMDYg%2B&caseno=WP(C)/436/2024&cCode=1&cino=MLHC010014222024&state_code=21&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
