SHILLONG: In a blatant case of defiance of judiciary, state government has refused to comply with a High Court verdict that upholds an officer’s right to be reinstated in his position as head of department.
On September 17, 2020, the Meghalaya High Court ruled in favour of Director, Printing & Stationery, Salgira R Marak, in a case involving arbitrary transfer as OSD, (personnel) to accommodate the Joint Director, EDR Tariang who has completed only one years of service in this post. Five weeks since, for some internal intrigues the aggrieved officer is left high and dry and may have no option but to move the court again to get justice.
The High Court in its 19-page judgement observed that the post of OSD is a newly created one and ‘is not borne in the cadre of the Printing & Stationery (Technical) Service Rules, 1995, therefore an ex-cadre post. “A plain meaning of ‘cadre’ as understood is the strength of service or part of a service, which therefore clearly implies that the new post of OSD cannot be taken to be part of the strength of the service in the cadre of printing and Stationery (Technical) service,” the High Court observed.
Although the state government through the Advocate General pleaded that the post is not outside the cadre and that even if assuming that the said post is outside the cadre there is no requirement to seek consent in express terms, the High Court observed that in a posting beyond the cadre of selection, an employee cannot usually be posted or transferred without his consent.
In the case of Marak, the High Court observed, “No consent was sought from the petitioner and moreover he did not join the post of OSD to enable the respondents (state government) to contend that there was tacit acceptance of the transfer beyond his cadre. Schedule I to the Rules and the post mentioned therein clearly go to show that the posting or transfer was beyond the cadre in which the petitioner was selected.”
In the normal course, transfers and postings are done to improve the performance of a Department, in this case, the former minister Printing & Stationery, Kyrmen Shylla was allegedly under a lot of pressure from his party colleagues in the UDP to post their candidates, mainly as fourth graders but which was resisted by the Director, SR Marak on account of financial constraints faced by the Department.
The final order of the High Court is that the posting order passed by the Department of Printing & Stationery in respect of SR Marak vide Letters no SG.12/97/169 and SG.12/97/170 respectively, dated September 8, 2019 are unsustainlbel in law as being issues in violation of the Statutory Rules and both have been quashed.
In the light of the High Court judgment the petitioner should have been reinstated to his post but it is learnt that the government is trying to change the service rules to meet what can be called an earlier transgression on its part. Marak has not yet been reverted to his post of Director, Printing and Stationery which in this case amounts to contempt of the High Court order and judgment.
It is learnt that there are as many as 40 peons and 45 daily wagers in the Department which is more than the number required, but which has happened because of political pressure on the respective ministers handling the Department. In the latest cabinet reshuffle the Printing and Stationery Department has changed hands from Kyrmen Shylla of the UDP to Brolding Nongsiej of the same party.
It is also learnt that some bigwigs in the UDP continue to exert pressure on the ministers to appoint their camp followers. The ministers are beholden to the party bigwigs for giving them the tickets to contest elections and as a quid pro quo they have to do the bidding of these party bigwigs.
Chief Minister, Conrad Sangma is in the know of things but has to keep the MDA afloat and cannot therefore go against the misdemeanours committed by respective ministers in the coalition.
Meanwhile officers are transferred arbitrarily if they refuse to toe the line of their political masters.