Bahar Uddin Laskar vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 3530 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Bahar Uddin Laskar vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 27 February, 2025

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                   Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010052222017




                                                            undefined

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

                           Case No. : WP(C)/7260/2017

         BAHAR UDDIN LASKAR
         S/O ASAID ALI LASKAR R/O VILL- DAKHIN MOHANPUR PT.VII, P.O.
         DAKHIN MOHANPUR P.S. SONAI DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM and 4 ORS.
         REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
         SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM

         2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
         TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          FINANCE DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI
         ASSAM

         3:THE DIRECTOR

          SOCIAL WELFARE
          ASSAM
          UZANBAZAR
          GUWAHATI-1
          ASSAM

         4:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER

          SILCHAR
          DIST. CACHAR
          ASSAM

         5:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER
                                                                  Page No.# 2/7


             LAKHIPUR ICDS PROJECT
             FULERTAL
             DIST. CACHAR
             ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR.N BARUA, MR.I AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, GA, ASSAM




             Linked Case : WP(C)/8398/2022

            BAHAR UDDIN LASKAR
            S/O. ASAID ALI LASKAR
            VILL. DAKHIN MOHANPUR PT.VII
            P.O. DAKHIN MOHANPUR
            P.S. SONAI
            DIST. CACHAR
            ASSAM
            PIN-788119.


             VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
            REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
            DEPT. OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT (EARLIER SOCIAL
            WELFARE DEPT.) DISPUR
            GUWAHATI-06
            ASSAM.

            2:THE JOINT SECRETARY
            TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
             DEPTT. OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT (EARLIER SOCIAL
            WELFARE DEPT.) DISPUR
             GUWAHATI
            ASSAM.

            3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
            TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
            FINANCE DEPTT.
            DISPUR
            GUWAHATI-06
                                                                    Page No.# 3/7

          ASSAM.

          4:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT (A AND E)

         ASSAM
         MAIDAMGAON
         BELTOLA
         GUWAHATI-29
         ASSAM.

          5:THE DIRECTOR

         WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
         ASSAM
         (EARLIER SOCIAL WELFARE
         ASSAM) UZAN BAZAR
         GUWAHATI-01
         ASSAM.

          6:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER

         SILCHAR
         DIST. CACHAR
         ASSAM.

          7:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER

         LAKHIPUR ICDS PROJECT
         FULERTAL
         DIST. CACHAR
         ASSAM.
         ------------
         Advocate for : MR G BAISHYA
         Advocate for : GA
         ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS



                               BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                  ORDER

27.02.2025 Heard Mr. G. Baishya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. U Sharma, learned Counsel for the State respondents in both the writ petitions Page No.# 4/7

and Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 in W.P(C) No. 8389/2022.

The petitioner is before this Court was engaged as a causal employee under Lakhipur ICDS Project in the District of Cachar on 16.02.1993 and since then he has been paid honorarium which was increased from time to time. On 14.10.2015, he was appointed as a Grade-IV Peon with the pay band of Rs. 4560/- to Rs. 15,500/- with grade pay of Rs. 1500/- from the date of joining and accordingly, the petitioner joined on 17.10.2015. However, till the date, he has been paid an honorarium of Rs. 9000/- only. He has approached the authorities for considering his case for regularizing his services but the same had been turned down and he has also not been paid the minimum scale of pay as he is entitled to be paid in terms of the Judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in State of Assam Vs. Upen Das, reported in (2017) 4 GLR 493.

W.P.(C) No. 7260/2017 is filed by the petitioner putting to challenge the order passed by the Social Welfare Department whereby his case for regularization was not considered in view of the department's decision that a direction was give by this Court vide order dated 19.01.2005 was only to consider his case for regularization as per the policy decision of the State Government. The policy decision of the State Government is to regularize Muster Roll Workers engaged prior to 01.04.1993. According to the respondents, the petitioner was not appointed as a Muster Roll Worker but as a casual employee and therefore his case cannot be considered for regularization. Being aggrieved, the W.P.(C) No. 7260/2017 was filed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the decision of department, the Judgment in the case of Upen Das (Supra) came to be rendered and the respondent authorities had initiated a proposal for grant of Page No.# 5/7

minimum scale of pay to the employees who were engaged prior to AFRBM

period which is 1st of Sept, 2005 and the proposal was sent on 14.02.2023. The said proposal contains enclosures reflecting the names of various work charged, Muster Roll, Casual employees, Bunglow Peons working under the Women and Child Development Department (formally known as Social Welfare Department) for more than last 10 years. The name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 37 and his date of engagement was shown to be 16.02.1993 and his length of service is 29 years.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the proposal being sent, the petitioner having approached the authorities to consider his case for grant of minimum scale of pay, the same has not been considered. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No. 6832/2022 whereby direction was issued to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner therein for grant of minimum scale of pay. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, the case of the petitioner therein was considered and he was also granted the minimum scale of pay. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner therein in W.P.(C) No. 6832/2022 Shri Islamuddin Ahmed also appears in the list at Sl. No. 26 whereas the name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 37. He therefore submits that the department having considered names of persons in the list enclosed with the proposal dated 14.02.2023 and overlooking the claims of the writ petitioner, is arbitrary and therefore the respondents are liable to be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of minimum scale of pay in view of regularization.

The respondents have contested the matter by filing their affidavit in Page No.# 6/7

opposition where they support the rejection of the prayer of the petitioner for regularization on the ground that the policy decision of the Government of Assam was only for regularization of Worked charge and Muster Roll workers who were engaged prior to 01.04.1993. In so far the writ petitioner is concerned, he was not engaged as either rather he was engaged as casual worker. That apart, the regularization order issued by an Officer of the Department has been discounted by the department itself that the same was not issued following the proper procedure.

Ms. Sharma on the other hand however does not dispute the position in law that a Division Bench of this Court in Upen Das (Supra) by placing reliance on State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh, reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148 has permitted the respondent departments therein to consider the case of Muster Roll, worked charged or other similarly situated workers to be granted minimum scale of pay.

Under such circumstances, since it is not disputed that the directions passed in by a Division Bench of this Court in Upen Das(Supra) are equally applicable to be Women and Child Development Department, Government of Assam, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be closed directing the respondent to consider the case for grant of minimum scale of pay. There is also no dispute that pursuant to orders passed by Co-ordinate Bench, persons similarly situated to the petitioner, whose name appeared in the list enclosed with the proposal, have also been granted the benefit of the minimum scale of pay.

In that view of the matter, the writ petitions stand closed directing the respondent authorities particularly respondent No.1 to examine the grievances of the petitioner and considering the fact that a proposal has already been forwarded for grant of minimum scale of pay to the employees by the Director Page No.# 7/7

Women and Child Development Department to the Principal Secretary, Government of Assam , Women and Child Development Department enclosing the list of employees, the department will examine and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible within the outer limit of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of in terms of the above. No order as to cost.

The counsel appearing for the Accountant General has placed on record a copy of the instructions which reveal that the Office of the Accountant General has no role to play in respect of the prayer made in respect of the writ petitioner.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant