Gauhati High Court
Faruque Md Saikia And 6 Ors vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors Rep. By The ... on 31 May, 2024
Author: Suman Shyam
Bench: Suman Shyam
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010102282024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1573/2024
1: FARUQUE MD SAIKIA AND 6 ORS
S/O MAHCHIN ALI SAIKIA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND PO
LOHARKATHA, PS MUKALMUA, DIST NALBARI, ASSAM 781126
2: JIAUL HAQUE
S/O- CHANDMOHAMMAD ALI R/O- VILLANDP.O.- BARNI
P.S.- HAJO 781102 KAMRUP (R)
3: ROHAN MAHMOOD
S/O ABDUR RASHID RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
PO AND PS ABHAYAPURI DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783384
4: RAJIB KR DEKA
S/O MADHU RAM DEKA RESIDENT OF VILAGE BAGTA
PS HAJO DIST KAMRUP(R) ASSAM 781102
5: MIRAJUDDIN AHMED
S/O FAIZUDDIN AHMED RESIDNET OF VILLAGE AND PO JAGARA
NALBARI ASSAM 781310
6: HAINA BASUMATARY
D/O GAJENDRA BASUMATARY VILLAGE DHALIGAON
PS DHALIGAON PO DHALIGAON DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783385
7: MD. RAKIB AKTER KHAN
S/O RAZA KHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MALLPARA
PO CHENIMARI PS TARABARI DIST BARPETA ASSAM 78130
VERSUS
1: THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND
SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS),
DEPTT. ASSAM, SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
Page No.# 2/4
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF
ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (BUILDING AND NH) DEPTT. ASSAM
SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
4:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY (E) PW (BLDG AND NH) DEPTT. ASSAM
ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
5:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PPWRD (ESTT. -B)
BRANCH ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
6:ASSAM PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
JAWAHAR NAGAR KHANAPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781022
7:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY ASSAM PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
JAWAHAR NAGAR KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-2
Linked Case : W.A. No.5738/2024 (Filing Number)
FARUQUE MD SAIKIA AND 6 ORS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
For the Applicant(s) : Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Nath, Standing Counsel, PWD for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
: Mr. T.J. Mahanta, Standing Counsel, APSC, assisted by Ms. P.
Sarma, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 & 7.
-B E F O R E -
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
31.05.2024
(Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)
The matter comes upon for consideration of the interlocutory
application preferred on behalf of the applicants/appellants with a prayer to
condone the delay of 768 days in filling the connected appeal.
Page No.# 3/4
The applicants/appellants have filed a writ petition being WP(C)
No.744/2020 before this Court with a prayer for setting aside the advertisement
dated 19.11.2019 issued by the State for the purpose of recruitment of Junior
Engineers (Civil) in Public Works Department on the ground that they are
working on the same posts on stopgap basis as per Regulation 3(f) of the
Assam Public Service Commission (Limitation of Functions) Regulations, 1951.
They have also prayed for regularization of their services on the aforesaid posts.
The learned Single Judge, after hearing the applicants/appellants as
well as the respondent State, has dismissed the said writ petition vide judgment
& order dated 14.03.2022 and further directed the State to initiate the selection
process pursuant to the advertisement dated 19.11.2019. Against the judgment
& order passed by the learned Single Judge on 14.03.2022, the applicants/
appellants have preferred a writ appeal with a delay of 768 days.
The applicants/appellants have contended that the delay caused in
filing the connected appeal is because till date the selection process has not
been initiated by the respondents and the applicants/appellants are still
continuing on temporary basis till date. It is further contended that now since
the respondents have initiated the selection process, they advised to file the writ
appeal challenging the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants/appellants and
after going through the contents of the application, we are of the view that the
applicants/ appellants have failed to offer any satisfactory explanation in
condoning the delay in filing the connected appeal. In such circumstances, we
are of the view that the prayer made by the applicants/appellants for condoning
the delay of 768 days in filing the connected appeal is devoid of any merit and
Page No.# 4/4
hence, the same is dismissed. Resultantly, the connected writ appeal, which is
yet to be numbered, is also dismissed.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
