PHURPA THINGLEY Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
LAWS(GAU)-2018-10-137
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (AT: ITANAGAR)
Decided on October 31,2018

Phurpa Thingley Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

AJIT BORTHAKUR, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Subu Koyang, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Duge Soki, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State Respondents No. 1 to 3; and Mr. R. B. Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondent No. 4. Perused records.
(2.) The petitioners, by preferring this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have challenged the legality and validity of the impugned order, dated 10.6.2014, whereby the private respondent No. 4, who is purportedly junior to the petitioners, has been placed above the seniors in the seniority/gradation list of the Head Constables and the impugned order, dated 8.9.2015, whereby the said private respondent No. 4 has been promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police from the rank of Head Constable.
(3.) The petitioners have contended and Mr. Koyang, learned counsel, appearing on their behalf submitted that the petitioners along with the private respondent No. 4 were appointed as Constable in the Arunachal Armed Police Battalion (For short 'AAP Bn.') in 1988. The first seniority list of Constables of the AAP Bn. was prepared on the basis of marks obtained in the interview for appointment of Constable vide No. P-076/Pt, dated 28.10.1992. The seniority of the petitioners and the respondent No. 4 in the said seniority list was as under: 1. Sri Phurpa Thinley at serial No. 14. 2. Sri Ngamnei Suyang at serial No. 22. 3. Sri Nokchu Sumnyan at serial No. 30. 4. Sri Yorko Tamang at serial No. 36 (private respondent No. 4). 5. Sri Gopak Riba at serial No. 45. 6. Sri Tashi Tsedar at serial No. 63. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.