Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4081 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010206882022




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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/6739/2022

         BHANTU DAS AND 2 ORS
         S/O LATE KESHAB CHANDRA DAS, R/O VILL-BOROGAON, P.O. AND P.S.-
         SORBHOG, DIST-BARPETA, ASSAM

         2: JAHIRUL ALI
          S/O GIYAS ALI
          R/O VILL-TENGAGAON
          P.O.-AMGURI
          DIST-BARPETA
         ASSAM

         3: MIR FAJAL HOQUE
          S/O LATE MIR MAJJAM HUSSAIN
          R/O VILL-PAKABHOTBARI
          P.O.-JARABARI
          DIST-BARPETA
         ASSA

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
         THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
         OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

         2:THE SECRETARY
          DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
          GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-6

         3:THE COMMISSIONER
          PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
          GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
                                                                      Page No.# 2/4

             PANJABARI
             JURIPAR
             GUWAHATI-37

             4:THE JOINT DIRECTOR
              OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONERATE
              PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
             ASSAM
              PANJABARI
              JURIPAR
              GUWAHATI-37

             5:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
              BARPETA ZILLA PARISHAD
              P.O.-BARPETA
              DIST-BARPETA
             ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. T DEWAN

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D.




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                         ORDER

21.10.2022

1. Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that the petitioners were engaged as Casual Workers w.e.f. 05.08.2004, at a fixed wage of Rs.1800/- per month, by the then Project Director, DRDA, Barpeta, vide order dated 05.08.2004. After abolishment of the DRDA in the year 2019, the petitioners started working under the establishment of the respondent no.5 and their monthly wages have been increased from time to time.

2. The petitioners' counsel submits that as the petitioners have been engaged prior to 01.09.2005 and are working till date, they are entitled to the Page No.# 3/4

benefit of the minimum scale of pay, as provided in paragraph 22 of the Division Bench judgment of this Court, in the case of State of Assam vs. Upen Das & 835 Others, WA No.45/2014.

3. Paragraph 22 of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in WA No.45/2014 is reproduced below, as follows :

"22. It is, however, heartening to learn that the State Government has agreed not to terminate the Muster Roll, Work Charged and similarly placed employees working since last more than 10 years (not in sanctioned post) till their normal retirement, except on disciplinary ground or on ground of criminal offences. The State Government has also agreed to enlist such employees in Health and Accidental and Death Insurance Scheme, which will be prepared in consultation with the State Cabinet. We appreciate this positive stand of the State Government taken a s welfare measures for the betterment and security of the employees, in question. We, accordingly, direct the State Government to implement the measures without further delay. Besides this, we, in the light of decision of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148, also direct the State Government to pay minimum of the pay scale to Muster Roll workers, Work Charged workers and similarly placed employees working since last more than 10 years (not in sanctioned post) with effect from 1.8.2017."

4. The petitioners' counsel submits that the present writ petition can be disposed of, if liberty is given to the petitioners, to file individual representations to the respondent no.3, who should take a decision with regard to whether the petitioners are entitled to the payment of the minimum scale of pay, as provided in paragraph 22 of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in WA No.45/2014.

5. Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 submit that they have got no objection to the prayer made by the petitioners' counsel.

Page No.# 4/4

6. In view of the consent of the parties, the petitioners are given the liberty to file individual representations to the respondent no.3, within a period of 1 (one) month from today. The respondent no.3 shall take a decision as to whether the petitioners are entitled to the payment of the minimum scale of pay, as provided in paragraph 22 of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in WA No.45/2014, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the petitioners' individual representations accompanied by a copy of this order. The decision taken by the respondent no.3 shall thereafter be communicated to the petitioners.

7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant