Gauhati High Court
Kalinath Doley vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 5 August, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010152662022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5039/2022
KALINATH DOLEY
SON OF LATE GOLOK DOLEY,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HARIANI,
P.O.- BILMUKH,
P.S.- GHILAMARA,
DIST.- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM.
PIN- 787053.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, ASSAM
SACHIBALAYA, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPARTMENT
ASSAM SACHIBALAYA
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-3.
4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
LAKHIMPUR DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
P.O.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 787001.
Page No.# 2/3
5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
LAKHIMPUR WEST SUB-DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
JAPISAJIA
P.O. NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM. PIN- 787031.
6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
ASSAM SACHIBALAYA
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006.
7:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ( A AND E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM. GUWAHATI- 781029
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 05.08.2022
Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the
petitioner was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker w.e.f. 16.05.1985 as Seasonal
Power Pump Operator and subsequently, he was regularised as a Grade-IV
employee w.e.f. 01.08.2017, vide an Office Order No. 11 dated 28.05.2019,
issued by the Office of the Executive Engineer, Lakhimpur Division (Irrigation).
He submits that the petitioner retired from service on 31.03.2021. Though the
petitioner had completed 35 years of service as a Muster Roll Worker, the
petitioner has not been given his pension till date.
Page No.# 3/3
Ms. R. Baruah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P. Nayak,
learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5, Mr. H. Sarma, learned
counsel for the respondent no. 2, Mr. S. K. Medhi, learned counsel for the
respondent no.7 and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6
submit that the Office Order dated 28.05.2019 is not an Order of regularisation
of the petitioner's service, but only an Order giving the benefit of minimum pay
scale of Grade-IV employee to the petitioner, in terms of Para 22 of the Division
Bench judgment of this Court in WA No. 45/2014. They also submit that the
petitioner has not filed any representation to the authority prior to approaching
this Court.
At this stage, Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he
may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition and file a representation to the
respondent no. 4.
On considering the prayer made by the petitioner's counsel, liberty is given
to the petitioner to file a representation to the respondent no.4.
In the event of the petitioner filing a representation to the respondent
no.4, the same should be decided within a period of one month from date of
receipt of the representation, which shall be accompanied by a copy of the writ
petition and a copy of this Order.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty being
given, as prayed for.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
