Raju Singha vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3586 Gua

                                                               Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010191352023




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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/5028/2023

         RAJU SINGHA
         S/O- KUNJA SINGHA ,
         R/O- PWD HAFLONG ROADS DIVISION,
         P.O AND P.S- HAFLONG, DIST- DIMA HASAO, ASSAM


         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
         REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS
         ROADS DEPARTMENTM(R AND B),
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, (ASSAM).

         2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
          DIMA HASAO AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL
          HAFLONG
          PIN-788819
          DIST- DIMA HASAO
         ASSAM

         3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
          PWD (ROADS)
          CHANDMARI
          GUWAHATI-03
          DIST- KAMRUP (M)
         ASSAM

         4:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER
          P.W.D
          HAFLONG
          DIMA HASAO
         ASSAM

         5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                                                                              Page No.# 2/3

             PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
             (R AND B)
             HAFLONG DIVISION
             HAFLONG
             DIST- DIMAHASAO
             ASSAM

            6:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
            TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
             FINANCE DEPARTMENT
             DISPUR-06
             DIST- KAMRUP (M)
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R BORA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P W D




                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                          ORDER

08-09-2023

Heard Shri R. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be working as a Work Charged Section Assistant from 20.05.1994 under the Office of the Executive Engineer, PWD (R & B) Dima Hasao. He had been approaching the respondents for regularization of his service and had ultimately filed a writ petition i.e. WP(C) No. 3469/2015. This Court vide judgment and order dated 21.09.2018 and disposed of the said writ petition alongwith a number of similarly situated writ petition with a direction for consideration in terms of the Office Memorandum of the State Government dated 27.06.2013 which had laid down three conditions in terms of paragraph 53 in the case of State of Karnataka Vs Uma Devi reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 read with the case of State of Karnataka Vs M. L. Kesri reported in (2010) 9 SCC 247.

It is submitted that no such consideration has been made and in the meantime, Page No.# 3/3

there is an apprehension that the vacancies are likely to be filled up in which case, the petitioner will suffer prejudice.

On the other hand, Shri Dhar, the learned State Counsel has submitted that regularisation cannot be done in a mechanical manner and such consideration is to be made as per the Office Memorandum dated 27.06.2023 which is also the direction of this Court in the earlier round of litigation.

Be that as it may, let notice be issued, returnable by 4 (four) weeks.

Shri R. Dhar, learned Standing Counsel, PWD accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 3; Ms. J. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, NC Hills Autonomous Council accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 4 & 5; Shri M. Bhuyan, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 6.

Let extra copies of the writ petition be served upon the learned counsel for the respondents by Monday.

Pendency shall not be a bar for consideration of the case of the petitioner in terms of the OM dated 27.06.2023 which was also directed by this Court in the earlier judgment dated 21.09.2018.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant