Smty Marde Kamgo v. The State of A.P

ORDER Date : 06-08-2024 Heard Mr. M. Kato, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R. Basar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

¶2The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed assailing an advertisement ,dated 07.03.2018, issued in respect of filing 4 (four) post of Lower Divion Clark (LDC for short) in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo, the respondent No. 3, with a further prayer to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of LDC from the post of typist which the petitioner is holding as at present.

¶3According to Mr. Kato, learned counsel for the petitioner that similarly situated persons have already been regularized in their post of LDC in resultant vacancies and therefore, the case of the petitioner may also be considered by the respondent authorities inasmuch as the petitioner had already filed representation before the authorities. Mr. Kato, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will not challenge the appointment of the respondent Nos. 4 & 5. Page No.# 3/3

¶4Now at this stage, Ms. R. Basar, learned Government Advocate submits that such an advertisement was not acted upon and therefore, no live cause of action, so far, the challenge to the advertisement is concerned, is there for the present writ petition. However, she submits that if a representation is filed, the employer shall definitely consider the same, however, as per the law and extent norms.

¶5In view of the aforesaid consensus, the present writ petition stands disposed of permitting the writ petitioner to file a fresh representation before her employer, namely, the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo i.e. the respondent No. 3.

¶6On receipt of such representation, the Deputy Commissioner shall consider the same and pass a reasoned order in this regard as per the extant norms and procedure laid down. Such exercise be carried out within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶7It is made clear that this Court has not commented on the merit of the claim of regularization of the petitioner as LDC nor on the stand of the respondent State. The Deputy Commissioner is to apply his own mind while considering the case of the petitioner as per the extent norms.

¶8With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC040002362018 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o (ITANAGARoBENCH) CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/187/2018o SMTYoMARDEoKAMGOo D/OoLT.oHOGMARoKAMGO,oPRESENTLYoSERVINGoASoTYPISToALCoUNDERo THEoESTABLISHMENToOFoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER,oWESToSIANGoDIST.o AALO,oAP.oPHONEoNO.o9774161263 o VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoA.P.o REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCHIEFoSECRETARY,oGOVT.oOFoAP,oITANAGAR. 2:THEoCOMMISSIONER/SECRETARY oAge:oti oOccupationo:o oGENERALoADMINISTRATIONoCIVILoSECRETARIAToITANAGARoAP.o 3:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONERo Age:otio Occupationo:o WESToSIANGoDIST.oAALOoAP.o 4:SMTYoNYAKENoANGOoLOLLENo Age:otio Occupationo:o PRESENTLYoSERVINGoAAoLOWERoDIVISIONoCLERKoCOMMISSIONERoWEST SIANGoDIST.oAALOoAP.o 5:SHRIoTONYAoETEo Age:otio Occupationo:o PRESENTLYoSERVINGoASoUPPERoDIVISIONoCLERKoUDCoUNDERoTHEo ESTABLISHMENToOFoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONERoWESToSIANGoDIST.oAALOo Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : M. Kato Advocate for the Respondent : R. Basar, G.A. T T Tara K. Lollen BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY