Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010121462024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3187/2024 UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI- 110001. 2: ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF MILITARY ENGINEERS SERVICE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEFS BRANCH ARMY HEADQUARTERS KASHMIRI GATE DHQ PO NEW DELHI- 110011. 3: HQ EASTERN COMMAND ENGINEERS BRANCH (KOLKATA) C/O- 99 APO PIN- 908542. 4: COMMANDER WORKS ENGINEER HQ 137 WLKS ENGINEER C/O 99 APO PIN- 793011. 5: CHIEF ENGINEER SHILLONG ZONE SPREAD EAGLE FALLS SHILLONG- 793011. 6: GARRISION ENGINEER SILCHAR MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICE C/O- 99 APO PIN- 900380 Page No.# 2/6 VERSUS CHANDAN PAUL MES/282018, PEON, GARRISON ENGINEER SILCHAR, MILITARY ENGINEER SERVICES, P.O.- ARUNACHAL, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788025. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHAKRAVARTY, Advocate for the Respondent : MR S CHOUDHURY, MS R MEDHI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 05.12.2025 (M. Zothankhuma, J) Heard Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the writ petitioners and Mr. S. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioners have prayed for setting aside the order dated 09.06.2023, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench, in OA No. 040/00033/2018, by which the respondent No. 1/applicant’s prayer, for promotion to the post of Mate (Electrician), has been allowed. The learned Tribunal, vide the impugned order, had held that the respondent No. 1 was entitled to the benefit of promotion in terms of the office order dated 17.01.2014, issued by the Directorate General of Personnel, CSCC Engineer-in- Chief’s Branch, Integrated HQ of MoD (Army), Kashmir House, New Delhi. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 29.03.2017 and 19.05.2017 were set aside. The petitioners were directed to hold a review DPC as per the circular dated 17.01.2014 and grant promotion to the respondent No. 1 to the post of Page No.# 3/6 Mate (Electrician) w.e.f. the date when similarly placed employees were granted promotion, who had passed the Trade test for Mate Electrician (Semi-skilled) and Electrician (Skilled). 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the post of Peon has a distinct promotional avenue, while the post of Mate (Electrician) can only be filled up by direct recruitment and deputation or re-employment of Armed Forces Personnel, at the ratio of 80% and 20% respectively, in terms of the Military Engineer Services Industrial Group ‘C’ Tradesman Mate (Semi-skilled) posts Recruitment Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Rules), which came into effect from 08.07.2013. 4. On the other hand, the promotional post of Peon is to the post of Daftry, in terms of the Military Engineer Services (Non-Industrial Class-III and Class-IV posts) Recruitment Rules 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 1971 Rules). As such, when there is a definite and separate Rule for recruitment to the post of Mate (Electrician), where appointment/recruitment to the post of Mate does not include promotion, the learned Tribunal erred in directing promotion of the respondent No.1 to the post of Mate (Electrician). 5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6. The operative portion of the order dated 09.06.2023, passed by the learned CAT, Guwahati Bench, in OA No. 040/00033/2018, states as follows:- “However, it is noted that since there are some different interpretation/instructions with regard to such promotion from un-skilled Page No.# 4/6 Chowkidar/Safaiwala/Peons to the Mates, therefore vide Office Order dated 17.01.2014, clarification was given. Since the latest circular is of 2014 and that would prevail the field. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of promotion. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 29.03.2017 and 19.05.2017 and direct the respondents to grant promotion to the applicant to the post of Mate Electrician with effect from the date when the similarly placed employees were granted promotion, who had passed the trade test along with the applicant, with all consequential benefits by holding a review DPC as per their latest circular dated 17.01.2014. The respondents are further directed to carry out the above exercise within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 7. The office order dated 17.01.2014, on the basis of which the promotion of the respondent No. 1 was to be affected as per the impugned order, states as follows:- “PROMOTION OF CHOWKIDAR-SAFAIWALAS TO MATES 1. A number of references have been received from lower formations regarding promotion of Chowkidar-Safaiwala to Mates. It is clarified that new RRs of Mates, (SRO 48 dated 08 July 2013) has come into force with the date of its notification, 08 July 2013. As per this SRO Chowkidars-Safaiwalas are not the feeder category for promotion to Mates. 3 However, as per earlier SRO. No. 169 of 2004(effective upto 07 July 2013), Chowkidar-Safawwalas were eligible for promotion to Mates if they had passed the trade test of Mates. It is therefore clarified that upto 07 July 2013 all those Chowkidars-Safalwalas who have passed the trade test of Mates will be governed by SRO 169 of 2004 3 You are requested to take necessary action accordingly and disseminate above clarification to the lower formations.” 8. A bare perusal of the office order dated 17.01.2014 clearly shows that Chowkidars and Safaiwalas were eligible for promotion to Mate up to 07.07.2013, in terms of the earlier SRO No. 169/2004, if they had passed the Page No.# 5/6 Trade Test of Mates. However, the Office Order dated 17.01.2014 clarified that in terms of the new Recruitment Rules for Mates (SRO 48 dated 08.07.2013), Chowkidars and Safailwalas were not the feeder posts/category for promotion to Mates. 9. The above clearly shows that only Chowkidars and Safaiwalas had been eligible for promotion to Mates up to 07.07.2013, in terms of SRO No. 169/2004. There is nothing in SR No. 169/2004 to show that Peons were eligible for promotion to Mates. As such, we are of the view that the learned Tribunal was in error in directing the promotion of the respondent to the post of Mate (Electrician) as per the circular dated 17.01.2014, as the same is not applicable to Peons. 10. The above being said, the 1971 Rules provides for promotion of Peon, having 3 years of service in the grade of Peon to the post of Daftry. As correctly stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the 2013 Rules provides for recruitment to the post of Mates in the ratio of 80% by direct recruitment and 20% by deputation or re-employment of Armed Forces Personnel, failing which, by direct recruitment. As can be seen from the 2013 Rules, there is no scope for promotion of Peon to Mate (Electrician). Though the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 had taken a stand that Chowkidars and Safaiwalas had been promoted to the post of Mates earlier, we are of the view that promotion of Peons to Mate cannot be done in terms of the 2013 Rules or the Office order dated 17.01.2014. 11. The above being said, it is an admitted fact that the respondent No. 1 has Page No.# 6/6 been given benefits under the MACP Scheme twice, the last one being in the year 2018. 12. In view of the reasons stated above, we are of the view that the learned Tribunal could not have directed the grant of promotion to the respondent No.1. Consequently, the impugned order dated 09.06.2023, passed by the learned CAT, Guwahati Bench, in OA No. 040/00033/2018, is hereby set aside. 13. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant