Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040013242026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/385/2026 Smti Yabur Jamoh Talom Wife of Late Tahong Talom, permanent resident of Rumgong Village, PO and PS Rumgong, Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and 5 Ors represented by the Secretary, District Administration, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Civil Secretariat, itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The Secretary/ Commissioner Department of Administrative Reforms Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Civil Secretariat Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh. 3:The Deputy Commissioner Siang District Boleng Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Departmental Promotional Committee dated 28.07.2025 headed by the Deputy Commissioner Boleng Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5:The Additional Deputy Commissioner Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 6:Smti Yami Mize MTS (Peon) presently serving under the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner Rumgong Siang District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Tagum Jamoh, Jobang Modi,N Doji,Keten Tabang Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Page No.# 2/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 13.08.2026 Heard Mr. Tagum Jamoh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Wangmo, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5. 2. By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “PRAYERS: In the premises aforesaid, it is therefore most respectfully prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to: I. issue a writ in the nature of CERTIORARI and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the entire records relating to the DPC held on 28.07.2025 for appointment/promotion of ALC/Un-skilled Contingency Staff to MTS under the establishment of the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District; II. issue a writ in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing and setting aside the recommendation of the DPC dated 28.07.2025 only insofar as it relates to Respondent No. 5, Smty. Yami Mize, upon finding that the petitioner was denied lawful and meaningful consideration in accordance with the applicable Recruitment Rules; III. consequently, quash and set aside Order No. SD/ ESTT(APPTT)-01/2025- 26 dated 31.07.2025, insofar as Respondent No. 5, Smty. Yami Mize, was appointed/ promoted as MTS (Peon) in preference to the petitioner without due consideration of the petitioner’s candidature; IV. issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondent authorities to convene a Review DPC/fresh Departmental Selection Committee, as may be appropriate, and consider the petitioner’s candidature for regular appointment/promotion to MTS (Peon) against the relevant vacancy by taking into consideration her seniority, complete Service Book, APAR/performance record, punctuality, integrity and all other relevant materials strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules, 2019 as amended in 2021; V. direct that such reconsideration shall relate back to the DPC held on 28.07.2025, and in the event the petitioner is found fit and entitled in comparison with Respondent No. 5, grant her appointment to MTS with effect from the date on which Respondent No. 5 was appointed/joined, together with all consequential service benefits, including appropriate Page No.# 3/6 seniority and notional benefits, as permissible in law; VI. issue a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS directing Respondent No. 3 to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 20.08.2025 by a reasoned and speaking order, insofar as such direction may remain necessary after adjudication of the principal reliefs; VII. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, if during disposal of the pending representation, or pendency of the proceedings or upon production of records it is found that another sanctioned MTS vacancy is available, direct the respondents to consider accommodating the petitioner against such available vacancy without disturbing Respondent No. 5, while protecting the petitioner’s appropriate seniority and consequential service benefits if she is found fit by the Review DPC; VIII. pass such other or further order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. INTERIM PRAYER: Pending final disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to create any third-party right or further alter the petitioner’s position vis-à-vis Respondent No. 5 in the cadre of MTS (Peon), and further direct the respondents to preserve the relevant vacancy position and the entire original records pertaining to the DPC dated 28.07.2025, including the seniority list, Service Books, APARs, NOCs, vigilance/integrity certificates, comparative assessment and all documents considered by the DPC.” 3. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as an Auxiliary Labour Corps(ALC) on 05.11.2004 and since then she has been serving as an ALC in the office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, Siang District. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Department has maintained a seniority list of the ALC/contingency staff serving in the office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, Siang District, wherein the name of the petitioner appears at Serial No. 3. It is further submitted that the service conditions of the petitioner are governed by the Recruitment Rules, namely, “The General Arunachal Service, Multi-Tasking Staff (Duftry/ Peon/Chowkidar/Mali/ Dak Runner/Sweeper/Kennelman/Water Carrier/Cook/Washerman/Cobbler and equivalent posts), Non-Gazetted, Group-‘C’ (Non-Ministerial) Common Recruitment (1st Amendment) Rules, 2021.” 5. Rule 2 of the said Recruitment Rules, 2021, being relevant, is extracted Page No.# 4/6 hereinbelow: “2. Amendment to the Schedule of the Principal Rules: In the schedule of column 10 of para (B), for the existing paras, the following shall be substituted:- 50% of the vacancies shall be filled up from amongst the serving un-skilled Contingency Staff/Auxiliary Labour Corps (ALC)/Casual Labour with minimum 15 years of continuous service in their respective offices/Departments and possessing educational qualification of Class-X/ITI or equivalent pass certificate from a recognized Board or Institution. The selection shall be made on the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee on the basis of the seniority, performance, punctuality and integrity certificate. The candidate who do not possess aforesaid requisite qualification and appointed prior to 1st June, 2010 shall also be considered for appointment to the post along with other candidate(s) subject to fulfilling of requisite requirements like seniority, performance, punctuality and integrity certificate by the aforesaid Selection Committee. In case sufficient number of un-skilled Contingency Staff/Auxiliary Labour Corps (ALC)/Casual Labour are not available with 15 (fifteen) years of continuous service, the Selection Committee may consider Contingency Staff/Auxiliary Labour Corps (ALC)/Casual Labour with upto 12 (twelve) years of continuous service. NB (i): The candidate who do not possess requisite educational qualification of Matriculation/ITI or equivalent shall be retrained in terms of OM No. AR- 145/2009/56 dated 24th May, 2010. (ii): Seniority for regular appointment to the post of Multi Tasking Staff (MTS) shall be considered from the common seniority of all aforesaid categories maintained by the Appointing Authority in terms of OM No. AR-152/2011 dated 9th January, 2012.” 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has passed Class-X and having served the establishment for about 22 years, she, therefore, is eligible for consideration for regular appointment to the post of Multi Tasking Staff(MTS). It is further submitted that although the petitioner was eligible for consideration, respondent No. 3, namely, the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Boleng, vide W.T. Message dated 23.07.2025, requested the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, to send the Service Books of 10 (ten) persons mentioned therein. In the said W.T. Message, although the names of two ALCs working in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rumgong, whose names appeared at Serial Nos. 2 and 4 of the seniority list, were called for, the name of the petitioner whose name appeared at Serial No. 3 of the said list, was not included in the above-noted W.T. Message. Page No.# 5/6 7. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, pursuant to the names furnished to the Deputy Commissioner, Boleng, who is also the Chairman of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), the case of other persons including the private respondent, who is stated to be junior to the petitioner and whose name appears immediately below the petitioner in the seniority list, was considered. Thereafter, vide order dated 31.07.2025, the private respondent was appointed/promoted as Multi Tasking Staff(MTS) against the sanctioned vacancy. 8. However, at this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation requesting for consideration of her case for regularization, and further submits that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the said representation and to consider the petitioner’s case for appointment to the post of Multi Tasking Staff(MTS) from the date on which her junior was considered, if she is otherwise found eligible under the applicable Recruitment Rules. 9. The learned Government Advocate has submitted that she has no objection if the prayer made is only for disposal of the representation submitted by the petitioner, however, sufficient time may be granted to the respondent authority for such disposal. 10. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the limited prayer now pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the grievance of the petitioner requires consideration by the competent authority. The petitioner claims that her name was omitted while calling for the Service Books and that a person stated to be junior to her was subsequently considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee(DPC). These are matters which require examination from the relevant records, including the seniority list and the records placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). Page No.# 6/6 11. This Court, however, does not express any opinion on the petitioner’s eligibility or entitlement to appointment as a Multi Tasking Staff(MTS). The same shall be examined by the competent authority strictly in accordance with the applicable Recruitment Rules and other relevant instructions. 12. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 20.08.2025 by a reasoned and speaking order. While doing so, the competent authority shall examine the petitioner’s position in the common seniority list, her eligibility under the applicable Recruitment Rules, the records considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee(DPC) held on 28.07.2025 and the appointment/ promotion of the person stated to be junior to the petitioner. 13. If, upon such consideration, the competent authority finds that the petitioner was eligible and that her candidature was required to be considered along with the other eligible candidates, the competent authority shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including placing the matter before a Review Departmental Promotion Committee(DPC), if considered necessary. 14. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 60(sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. 15. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim. The competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with the applicable Rules. 16. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage itself. JUDGE Comparing Assistant