Subrata Talukdar, J. - (1.) THE case canvassed by the Writ Petitioner in this petition is as follows: - a) That the Petitioner is working as Senior Sanitary Supervisor with the Andaman and Nicobar Administration for the past 18 years. The petitioner is directly engaged under the Port Blair Municipal Council and was promoted to the present post in the year 1995. The name of the petitioner figures at serial No. 2 in the Seniority List of Senior Sanitary Supervisors. b) That earlier there was no notified recruitment rule for the post of Sanitary Inspector under the Respondent Municipal Council. The Rule governing the said appointment to the Post under the Respondent Municipal Council was dated 3rd May 2005. c) On 7th March, 2011 the Respondent Municipal Council caused to be published a draft recruitment rule being the Recruitment Rules, 2010 inviting suggestions and objections. On 13th September, 2011 vide the impugned notification No. 217 the respondent No. 2, being the Secretary, Port Blair Municipal Council on behalf of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration was pleased to frame Rules in exercise of powers conferred under sub -section (A) of Section 203 of the Andaman and Nicobar Island (Municipal) Regulation 1994 (for short the 1994 Regulation). By the said 1994 Regulation rules were made regulating the method of appointment to Group B and Group C posts under the Respondent Municipal Council being the posts of Sanitary Officer, Senior Sanitary Inspector, Sanitary Inspector, Senior Sanitary Supervisor, Sanitary Supervisor and Sanitary Jawabder. d) It is the case of the petitioner that against the draft notification dated 7th March, 2011 he had submitted objections addressed to the respondents but, till date, such objections have not been considered. e) The said impugned notification No. 217 dated 13th September, 2011, inter alia, provides for essential qualifications for direct recruits. Vide Serial No. 11 of the said impugned Notification No. 217 the method of recruitment for Sanitary Inspectors has been provided which is 50 per cent by promotion failing which by direct/recruitment and 50 per cent by direct recruitment. Vide Serial No. 12 of the said impugned Notification it is provided that promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector will be considered from the lower post of Senior Sanitary Supervisor in the pay band of Rs. 5200 - 20,200 with Grade Pay of Rs. 1900 with 8 years regular service and possessing the educational qualification prescribed for direct recruits under paragraph 8. f) It is also the case of the petitioner that in spite of possessing requisite qualifications prescribed under Serial No. 8(2), the requirement for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector as stipulated at Serial No. 12 of the impugned Notification No. 217, the promotional avenue of the petitioner by which his chance to be considered has been completely curtailed. g) It is the further case of the petitioner that the impugned Notification No. 217 which has been made in terms of Section 2(A) of Section 203 of the 1994 Regulation empowers the Respondent Authorities to frame such recruitment rules in terms of the provisions of the 1994 Regulation. The 1994 Regulation being a Presidential Law promulgated under Article 240 of the Constitution of India prescribes the mode and manner in which the Rules of recruitment are required to be brought into force. According to the petitioner, Regulation 204 of the 1994 Regulation mandates that every Rule made under the Regulation shall be laid, as soon as possible after it is made, before each House of Parliament while it is in session for a total period of 30 days which may comprise in one session or two or more successive sessions and, if before the expiry of the session immediately following the sessions or the successive sessions both Houses agree for making any modification in the Rule or by Law, only upon such agreement the Rule can take effect in the form agreed to by Parliament or, shall be of no effect as the case may be. h) Shri K.M.B. Jayapal, Ld. Counsel appearing for the petitioner asserts that the impugned recruitment Rule No. 217 has been notified on the 13th of September, 2011 without being placed before each House of Parliament as required upon a conjoint reading of the 1994 Regulation and Article 240 of the Constitution of India. Shri Jayapal points out that in the present case there has been a non -compliance of Regulation 204 of the 1994 Regulation. He contends that for the 1994 Regulation, being in the nature of a special statute prescribing a particular manner in which an act is to be done or, in other words, a particular manner in which a notification must take effect, cannot be promulgated or finally published without following due process. He submits that the exercise of power in the present case is a colourable one contrary to the provisions of Article 309 of the Constitution of India. i) The petitioner, therefore, is aggrieved by the fact that although he is continuing in the post of Senior Sanitary Supervisor since the year 1995 and having worked for nearly 18 years in the said post, his chances of being promoted to the higher post of Sanitary Inspector was not considered at all and now, after the promulgation of the impugned Rule No. 217, his promotional avenue has been completely curtailed. Shri Jayapal thus prays for issuance of a writ of Mandamus setting aside and/or the quashing the impugned Notification No. 217 dated 13th September 2011 and, in particular serial No. 8 of the said impugned Notification. He also prays for a writ of Mandamus upon the Respondent Authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector without applying the provisions of serial No. 8 of the impugned Notification No. 217 and other interim reliefs.
(2.) FOR contra Shri Arul Prasanth, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent Municipal Council has argued that the framing of the Recruitment Rules is in two stages. At the first stage the Respondent Municipal Council will consider the draft notification and then place the same before the Andaman and Nicobar Administration. Shri Prasanth submits that the Administration shall have the liberty to add, delete or modify the draft notification. Shri Prasanth brings to the notice of this Court that the draft notification challenged by the petitioner and appearing at Page 24 of W.P. No. 138 of 2014 is of the year 2010 and by the Resolution No. 219 dated 29th October, 2011 the same was amended.
(3.) HE furnishes before this Court a copy of the Resolution No. 219 dated 29th October 2011 amending the draft notification and submits that due process was followed in framing the Recruitment Rules.;