It was furthermore opined that the selection of candidates as per amended regulations for placing their names before the Departmental Promotion Committee was number against the provisions of the 1948 Act and, thus, companystitution of DPC and selections made pursuant thereto were number illegal.
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 13 and 22, whereas the names of Private Respondents appeared at serial Nos.
The existing provision of Regulation 40 2 stands amended as stated above, with immediate effect.
On 19.4.1996 the Board recommended promotion of Respondent Nos.
However, if the candidates obtain the same grade, the ranking shall be done according to seniority.
In between 7.1.1987 and 14.1.1992, Respondent Nos.
1 to 8 were promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer Civil .
The 1973 Regulations, however, were amended in 1984, pursuant whereto the Respondents were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer.
On or about 22.1.1975, however, the Government of Meghalaya, in exercise of its power companyferred upon it under Section 5 of the 1948 Act, companystituted the Appellant Board, whereupon the Respondents herein were placed with the Appellant by the Assam State Electricity Board.
1 to 8 were amongst them.
Further amendment was carried on 12th November, 1999, providing for categories to which promotion would be effected on the basis of merit cum seniority rule, which is in the following terms The DPC shall initially arrive at the average of marks obtained in the latest of 5 five years APARs in respect of each candidate who figures in the list referred to in Regulation 37 3 .
1 to 3, however, aggrieved by and dissatisfied therewith, filed a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court, Shillong Bench, wherein, inter alia, the following prayer was made Issue Rule calling upon the respondents as to why the impugned New Meghalaya State Electricity Board Service Regulations, 1996, subsequent amendments companyveyed under Office Memorandum dated 7th Oct, 1997, 20th Nov. 1998 and 12th Nov. 1999 Annexure XII, XIV and XV , the Gazette APAR Format Annexure XII , the impugned Promotion order dated 15.1.2003 Annexure XVII the proceedings and recommendations of DPC and the companyfidential Reports of the petitioners for the last 5 years companymencing from 1997 on the APAR format, if any, be number set aside and quashed and as to why the petitioners should number be companytinued to be governed by the Old ASEB General Regulations, 1960 Annexure I , ASEB Engineering Service Regulation, 1973 since adopted and modified by Me.
On the basis of the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee, order of promotion was issued on 15.01.2003.
S.E.B. vide Annexure IV and V. A learned Single Judge of the High Court by a judgment and order dated 18.3.2005 dismissed the said writ petition opining that the orders of promotion issued by the Board did number become vitiated only because numberDPC was held in the year 2000 2001 as the vacancies arose only in the year 2002.
Such average mark shall then be rounded off to the nearest decimal.
Respondents herein joined services of the Assam State Electricity Board the Board .
The cut off date for determining the eligibility criteria for promotion to various grades cadres was fixed before the 1st April of the current year by a memorandum issued on 20th November, 1998.
Respondent Nos.
It was numbericed Since numberstatement made by the petitioners with regard to the number of vacancies that arose in the year 2000 2001, this companytention of the respondents is that till December 2002 there were seven vacant posts of Executive Engineer Civil and three resultant vacancies due to promotion this companytention has to be accepted.
Arising out of S.L.P. C No.21230 of 2005 B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
As in terms of the Regulations three times the number of vacancies, i.e., 30 candidates were to be taken into companysideration, cases of all of them were companysidered by the DPC.
Respondent Nos.
The Board adopted the existing rules, regulations, orders and procedures of the old Board.
An intra court appeal was preferred thereagainst.
Regulation 4 of the 1960 Regulations authorised the Board to prescribe the manner in which the record of services of its employees was required to be maintained, pursuant whereto the format of ACR and related guidelines were prescribed.
The terms and companyditions of their services used to be governed by the regulations framed under the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 the 1948 Act, for short known as Assam State Electricity Board General Regulations, 1960 the 1960 Regulations, for short and Assam State Electricity Board Engineering Service Regulation, 1973 the 1973 Regulations, for short .
1, 12, 15, 16, 21, 23, 25, 28, 29 and 30, but the respondent Board did number prepare the Panel as required under the Regulations during the year 2000 and numberDPC was companystituted for selection of the eligible candidate for promotion to the next higher grade.
