Page No.# 1/7 vs The State Of Assam And 11 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1275 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010101402022




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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/5147/2022

         RANJIT DAS AND 13 ORS
         S/O LATE SUKUMAR DAS, R/O HOSPITAL ROAD, LALA WARD NO. VIII,
         P.O.-LALA, P.S.-LALA, DIST-HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788163

         2: LAKSHMI RANI DAS @ LAKHI RANI DAS
         W/O MONORANJAN DAS
         VILL-CHANDRAPUR PT.-I
          P.O.-CHANDRAPUR
          DIST-HAILAKANDI
         ASSAM

         3: ATABUR RAHMAN BARBHUIYAN
          S/O ABDUL JALIL BARBHUIYAN
         VILL-NORTH NARAINPUR PT.I
          P.O.-NORTH NARAINPUR
          P.S.-ALGAPUR
          DIST-HAILAKANDI
         ASSAM

         4: SUPARNA DEY
          D/O NARESH CHANDRA DEY
         VILL-NARIANPUR PT-
          P.O.-NORTH NARAINPUR
          P.S.-ALGAPUR
          DIST-HAILAKANDI
         ASSAM

         5: ANOWARA BEGUM LASKAR
          D/O KHALILUR RAHMAN LASKAR
         VILL-MOHANPUR PT-I
          P.O.-MOHANPUR
          P.S.-ALGAPUR
          DIST-HAILAKANDI
         ASSAM
                                Page No.# 2/7


6: SUJIT BASFOR
 S/O SONIKA BASFOR
VILL-CHANDIPUR TE
 P.O.-CHANDIPUR
 P.S.-ALGAPUR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

7: FAJAL AHMED LASKAR
 S/O ALATE TAHIR ALI LASKAR
VILL-ALGAPUR-I
 P.O.-KALIBARIBAZAR
 P.S.-ALGAPUR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

8: ASHU BASFOR
 S/O SHITAL PRASAD BASFOR
VILL-CHANDIPUR TE
 P.O.-CHANDIPUR
 P.S.-ALGAPUR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

9: MASUK AHMED MAZUMDAR
 S/O ABDUL HASIM MAZUMDAR
VILL-CHIPORSANGAN-II
 P.O.-CHIPORSANGAN
 P.S.-ALGAPUR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

10: BAPPI DEY
 S/O LATE BENU MADHAB DEY
VILL-KALINAGAR PART-I
 P.O.-KALINAGAR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

11: RAJENDRA KUMAR DEB
 S/O LATE JATINDRA KUMAR DEB
VILL-KALINAGAR PART-I
 P.O.-KALINAGAR
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

12: SAMARENDRA SINGHA
                                                     Page No.# 3/7

S/O MANIDHAN SINGHA
VILL-NITYANANDAPUR II
P.O.-NITYANANDAPUR
P.S.-LALA
DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

13: GHANASHYAM BHOR
 S/O ROMESH BHOR
VILL-NUNAIKHAL
 P.O.-VERNERPUR
 P.S.-LALA
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM

14: MANKU DEY
 S/O MANIK RANJAN DEY
VILL- LALPANI
 P.O.-BARTHAL
 P.S.-LALA
 DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSA

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS
REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,
GUWAHATI-06

2:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
ASSAM
 HENGRABARI
 GUWAHATI-36

3:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788155

4:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 LALA BPHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788163
                                Page No.# 4/7

5:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 NORTH NARAINPUR NPHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788801

6:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 MOHANPUR CHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788150

7:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
ALGAPUR BPHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788150

8:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 CHIPORSANGAN NPHC
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788801

9:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 SOROJANI BPHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788801

10:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
 NITYANANDAPUR S.D
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788168

11:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
VERNERPUR NPHC
 HAILAKANDI
 DIST-HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
 PIN-788167

12:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
                                                                                     Page No.# 5/7

             BILAIPUR MPHC
             HAILAKANDI
             DIST-HAILAKANDI
             ASSAM
             PIN-78811

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M DASGUPTA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HEALTH




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                            ORDER

Date : 29-03-2023

Heard Mr. M. Dasgupta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners, who were engaged as casual workers under the various Hospital Management Committee/society under the respondent health department. It is submitted that the petitioners have been working for more than 10 years and they have also the requisite educational qualifications, skill sets and experience. It is further submitted that inspite of their entitlement, they have not been given the minimum pay scales as has been done in respect of other similar workers.

Being aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate orders from this court.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar writ petition being WP(C) No. 7711/2016 was disposed of by the co-ordinate bench of this court, which went on appeal being W.A. No. 206/2018 and the Division Bench by judgment and order dated 25.08.2022 remanded the matter back to the co-ordinate bench for re-hearing and deciding the mater on merit. Pursuant to the order of the Division Bench, the co-ordinate bench heard the matter again and disposed of the writ petition Page No.# 6/7

with the following directions.

"21. As can be seen from the contention of the learned counsels for the parties and the contents of the preceding paragraphs, the only issue left to be decided is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to the payment of minimum scale of pay in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench of his Court in W.A. No. 45/2014. In this respect, it has to be first noted that no prayer to the said effect has been made by the petitioners in the writ petition.

22. Be that as it may, paragraph No. 22 of the Division Bench Judgment & Order dated 08.06.2017 passed in W.A. No. 45/2014 gives a direction to the State Government to pay minimum of the pay scale to Muster Roll Workers, Work-Charged Workers and similarly placed employees working since the last more than 10 years (not in sanctioned post) in light of the decision of the Apex Court in State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh, reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148.

23. As it appears, most of the petitioners have been engaged by the Hospital Management Society and not by the State Government, and only 5 out of the 29 writ petitioners are being given fixed wages. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the concerned Hospital Management Committee/State respondents will have to consider the giving of minimum scale of pay to the petitioners, provided they are still working in the two Hospitals and are entitled to the same. Consequently, the petitioners are given the liberty to submit individual representations to the Superintendent of the two Hospitals, with regard to their claim for payment of the minimum scale of pay. The concerned Superintendent, being the Member Secretary of the concerned Hospital Management Committee, shall thereafter place the same before the appointing authority, who shall thereafter consider the case of the petitioners, with regard to payment of the minimum scale of pay and make due payment, if they are entitled to the same. The petitioners should submit their individual representations within three weeks from today. Thereafter, the decision/s on the petitioners' representations should be made within a further period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and the petitioners' representations."

Learned counsel for the parties submits that the issues involved in the present writ petition are squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 10.11.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 7711/2016.

Accordingly, in terms of the judgment and order dated 10.11.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 7711/2016, the present writ petition is also allowed directing the Page No.# 7/7

respondents to determine the entitlement of the minimum scale of pay required to be paid to the petitioners and thereafter take appropriate steps to release the same, if found to be payable to the petitioner.

The petitioners are at liberty to approach the concerned authority by filing necessary representations along with a certified copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above.

No order as to costs.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant