Gauhati High Court
Alaka Kalita vs Sanjib Bhuyan And Anr on 29 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010063362019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/176/2019
ALAKA KALITA
W/O- SRI APURBA KUMAR TALUKDAR, R/O- VILL- AND P.O- BANGAON,
DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781325
VERSUS
SANJIB BHUYAN and ANR.
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ELEMENTARY, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI - 9,
KAMRUP(M), ASSAM
2:SMTI. BIJOYA CHOUDHURY
DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-781019.
3:PREETAM SAIKIA
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. D MOZUMDER
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO
ORDER
Page No.# 2/3
Date : 29/11/2021
Heard Mr. B.D. Das, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also
heard Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
The petitioner who was appointed as a teacher vide order dated 04.12.1999
issued by the Director of Bodoland Territorial Council was transferred
subsequently to another districts which does not come under the BTC. After her
appointment she was paid the monthly salary from the date of her appointment
for six long years. However payment of her salary stopped thereafter. Being
aggrieved she approached this Court by filing WP(C) 1728/2015. After the
matter was heard, the same was disposed off by the judgment and order dated
22.01.2019. In that judgment, the respondents were directed to pay the salary
of the petitioner both arrear and current if, after verification, she is found to
have discharged her duties. The time given for completing the whole process
was 45 days. Since the direction was not complied with, the petitioner
approached this Court once again by filing the instant contempt petition. The
respondent No.3 Director of Elementary Education filed an affidavit in opposition
stating that the petitioner was indeed found to have worked all these times but
she could not be paid her pay and allowances since she was appointed illegally
or irregularly. However, the affidavit also stated that among the 2272 number of
teachers who were illegally or irregularly appointed those who were paid their
salaries for a period of 6 years shall continue to be paid their pay and
allowances but the petitioner who also falls in that category same not been paid
like other similarly situated persons since her appointment was illegal and
irregular.
On the admission made by the respondents, it is clear that the petitioner
continued to work as a teacher and her service was utilized. Therefore, there is
Page No.# 3/3
no reason why she should not be paid for the service rendered by her as
directed by this Court. Failure to do so will not only attract the provision of
Contempt of Court Act but will amount to force labour which is illegal. As such
the respondents should have complied with the direction given by this Court.
The explanation given in the affidavit are not something that can be raised in a
contempt petition. If they want to they should have raised them at the time of
hearing of the writ petition or by filing an appeal or review which they have not
done.
Keeping all the above in view, the respondents are given an extended time
of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order to comply
with the order of this Court passed in the writ petition i.e. WP(C) 1728/2015. In
case of their failure to do so, they shall appear in person.
List the matter again on 07/01/2022.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
