PROMOTIONS TO ADDL DIRECTOR POSTS AT HRD DEPTT,Govt. of Sikkim
Gangtok April 12: Appointments and promotional procedures have become contentious issues of late with the State Government more often than not, getting caught on the wrong foot for deviating from the straight path.
In what can be called 50-50 resolution to a petition filed against State Government in the Sikkim High Court on case of promotions to the posts Assistant Directors in the Human Resources Development Department. The High Court while upholding the promotion of one has directed the government that other be removed from the post of AD by quashing the order which promoted him so. The petition was filed by 24 persons vying for the posts.
At the time of promotion, both Sukh Bahadur Subba and Tshewang Penzo Pazo were Post Graduate teachers working on deputations at HRDD.
The rules governing the promotion in HRDD stipulate that the post of AD,junior grade,is required to be filled up 100% by way of promotion and the feeder post is only that of an Assistant Education Officer; the qualificatio required is 8 years of regular service as an AEO.
The government admitted that neither of the two promoted were AEO's and could not be promoted with, or in accordance,of the said rules.
Upholding Mr.Subba's promotion,The High Court observed that his absorption was made because he was needed to look after the Limboo text books and justifies his promotions as no other prospective promotee claimed to be familiar with the Limboo Language and as such the recorded in his promotion order is ' bonafide and compelling' which says the Government was desirous for absorbing Subba as AD,Text Books (Limboo). However, concerning the other respondent, the Court observed that order of his promotion does not earmark him for any specialization.It also observed that such promotion cannot be made without paying any attention to the Rules of without complying with Rule 16 which permits the government to relax Rules which specify the reasons for relaxation have to be recorded in writing which have to be reasons forwarded by the State and not the respondent. The only written statement that SPSC didnot object to his promotion. Ruling that the reasons forwarded by the State didnot bear any scrutiny at all as 100% promotional quota could easily be made as there were many candidates waiting.
Directing that the notification relating to promotion of Mr. Pazo be quashed.The High Court ruled that the seniority list be corrected so as not to include him figuring at all in the Sikkim State Education Cadre as per the rules of 1996.However, he is be given an appropriate designation and posting so that he gets his emoluments as PG teacher withoutbreak in service of loss of seniority.
Sikkim Served Fresh Daily
