Page No.# 1/7 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1231 Gua

                                                                Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010053612018




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                            Case No. : WA/93/2018

         THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (PRINCIPAL SEAT) EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
         AND ANR
         GUWAHATI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECY. GENERAL

         2: THE SECY. GENERAL

         THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (PRINCIPAL SEAT) EMPLOYEES
         ASSOCIATION
         GUWAHATI
         GUWAHATI-

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR,
         GUWAHATI 781006

         2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

          FINANCE DEPTT.
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-6

         3:THE LEGAL REMEMBRANCE AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

          JUDICIAL DEPTT.
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-6

         4:THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
          GAUHATI HIGH COURT
          GUWAHATI
                                                                            Page No.# 2/7

Advocate for the Petitioner    : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, SENIOR ADVOCATE

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (Oral) Date : 30-03-2021

(Suman Shyam, J)

Heard Mr. K. N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. J. Patowary,

learned counsel appearing for the appellants. We have also heard Mr. T. J. Mahanta,

learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing

Counsel, Finance Department, Assam, appearing for the State respondents.

2. By filing this writ appeal, the judgment and order dated 06.04.2017 passed by

the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.1724/2015 has been assailed by the writ

petitioners as appellants on the grounds stated in the memo of appeal.

3. The core controversy in this proceeding pertains to the claim of the Gauhati

High Court (Principal Seat) Employees Association for better pay structure and parity

of pay with those employees of the High Court serving in the Outlying Benches. Taking

note of the discrepancy in their pay structure and in view of the Revision of Pay Rules

of the State of Assam (RoP Rules of 2017), which came into force with effect from

01.04.2016, covering the State Government employees, the Hon'ble Chief Justice,

Gauhati High Court, in exercise of powers conferred under Article 229 of the

Constitution of India, had framed "Gauhati High Court Revised Pay Rules, 2013 Page No.# 3/7

(Structure & Fixation). One of the basic object of the Rules of 2013 was to remove the

disparity in the pay structure of Gauhati High Court employees in the Principal Seat.

As per the provisions of Article 229 of the Constitution of India, Rules framed by the

Chief Justice of the High Court relating to salaries and emoluments etc. having

financial implications can be implemented only with the prior approval of the

Governor of the State. Accordingly, the Rules of 2013, which were apparently

modified again in the year 2015, were forwarded to the Judicial Department of the

Government of Assam for placing the matter before the competent authority for

necessary approval. However, when no action was taken in the matter even after

lapse of considerable period of time, the appellants had approached this Court by

filing WP(C) No.1724/2015 seeking a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to

grant approval to the Rules of 2013.

4. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for all the contesting parties

and upon threadbare analysis of the factual background of the case, the learned

Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition by making the following observations

and directions :-

"20. Court has also noticed that there is a broad consensus at the Bar that the

2013 Rules, as framed, may have to be revisited in view of the subsequent

developments as notice above. Accordingly and in the light of the above,

respondent No. 4 i.e., Registrar General, Gauhati High Court is directed to

place the matter before Hon'ble the Chief Justice at an early date so that

necessary modification may be made to the 2013 Rules or altogether a new Page No.# 4/7

set of Rules may be framed having regard to the grant of Principal Seat Pay to

the officers and staff of the Gauhati High Court (Principal Seat) and taking into

consideration the revised pay scales provided to the State Government

employees as per recommendations of the 7th Assam Pay and Productivity

Commission. Once the said exercise is completed at the level of the Gauhati

High Court, the same may be forwarded to the State Government which in

turn shall take appropriate decision thereon within a period of four months from

the date of receipt of fresh proposal from the Gauhati High Court having

regard to the mandate of Article 229 of the Constitution of India, as explained

above.

21. Till finalization of the Rules as above, benefits extended to the State

Government employees by the Government of Assam in terms of the 7th

Assam Pay and Productivity Commission shall also be extended to the officers

and staff of the Gauhati High Court (Principal Seat). Needless to say, the

Principal Seat Pay granted to the officers and staff would be in addition to the

above."

5. Mr. Choudhury submits that in terms of the impugned judgment and order

dated 06.04.2017, the members of the Appellant No.1 Association has been receiving

the benefits of the revised pay scale. However, being aggrieved by the observations

made in the order dated 06.04.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in so far as

the direction issued to the Registrar General, Gauhati High Court, to place the matter

before the Hon'ble Chief Justice so as to make necessary modifications in the Rules, Page No.# 5/7

the present appeal has been filed.

6. Mr. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, further

submits that his clients are basically aggrieved by the delay in the matter of finalizing

the pay structure by giving the just dues to the officers of the Gauhati High Court

(Principal Seat) and to that extent, the direction of the learned Single Judge would

entail further delay and complication in the matter. Contending that the

Government does not have the jurisdiction or authority to sit in appeal over the Rules

farmed by the Chief Justice of the High Court under Article 229 of the Constitution of

India, Mr. Choudhury submits that the approval of the Governor is required to be

granted with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and therefore, this is a

matter which ought to be first placed before the Assam Cabinet. In support of his

aforesaid argument, Mr. Choudhury has relied upon the decision of the Supreme

Court in the case of M. Gurumoorthy Vs. Accountant General, Assam and Nagaland

and others reported in 1971 (2) SCC 137 and another decision of the Apex Court

rendered in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Association of Court Stenos., P.A.,

P.S. and another reported in (2002)2 SCC 141.

7. Responding to the aforementioned submissions of Mr. Choudhury, Mr. T. J.

Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court, submits that after the order

dated 06.04.2017 was passed by the learned Single Judge, the matter was placed

before the Hon'ble Chief Justice whereafter, it was referred to the Rules Committee

for necessary examination. However, due to the pendency of the Writ Appeal, no

further action has been taken in the matter till today.

Page No.# 6/7

8. Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department, Assam, has

submitted that although views of the Government pertaining to the financial

constraint coming in the way of granting enhanced pay scale to the members of the

Appellant No.1 Association has been highlighted in the affidavit filed by the Finance

Department, yet, as on date, the Government has not rejected the Rules framed by

the Hon'ble Chief Justice under Article 229 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, if

the matter is processed through the Judicial Department, an appropriate decision

would be taken in the matter of granting approval to the Rules by the Governor of

Assam, in a time bound manner.

9. A perusal of the order dated 06.04.2017 goes to show that by the impugned

order, the learned Single Judge did not decline relief to the writ petitioners but, after

taking note of the some subsequent developments and the lapse of time since the

Rules of 2013 were framed, a direction was issued to merely place the matter before

the Chief Justice so as to consider, modification, if any, that were called for, in the

light of the observations made in the order and thereafter, forward the Rules to the

State Government so as to take appropriate decision in the matter within a period of

four months from the date of receipt of the fresh proposal. Having regard to the facts

and circumstances of the case, the aforesaid view expressed by the learned Single

Judge, in our view, cannot be termed as unreasonable warranting interference by

this Court. However, this Court is in agreement with the submission of Mr. Choudhury

that the entire matter needs to be expedited so as to prevent any further delay in

finalisation of the Rules.

Page No.# 7/7

10. After hearing the arguments advanced by learned counsel for all the parties,

we are of the view that ends of justice would be met in this case if the Rules are

forwarded to the competent authority for granting approval under Article 229 of the

Constitution of India at the earliest and on receipt of the same, the matter is

considered expeditiously and the decision of the Government is communicated to

the Registry of this Court without any undue delay.

11. We, therefore, dispose of this appeal by upholding the impugned order dated

06.04.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge. The exercise, as contemplated by the

impugned order dated 06.04.2017, be now carried forward by the Registrar General

and completed, as expeditiously as possible. Once the Rules are forwarded to the

Judicial Department for necessary approval, steps in the light of Article 229 of the

Constitution of India, be initiated expeditiously and a decision in the matter of

approval of the Rules be communicated to the High Court, within 60 (sixty) days from

the date of receipt of the Rules.

The order dated 06.04.2017 stands modified to the above extent.

The Writ Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

                                JUDGE                             JUDGE

T U Choudhury



Comparing Assistant