Friday, 15, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Dilip Kumar Devasarma vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 332 Gua

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 332 Gua
Judgement Date : 22 January, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Dilip Kumar Devasarma vs The State Of Assam And 7 Ors on 22 January, 2026

Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
                                                               Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010277542024




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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/7066/2024

         DILIP KUMAR DEVASARMA
         S/O LATE HARESWAR SARMA, R/O HOUSE NO. 21, MEDHI PHUKAN PATH,
         SHIV MANDIR, LAKHIMI NAGAR, HATOGAON CHARIALI, GUWAHATI-
         781038



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE LEGAL REMEMBRANCER AND SECRETARY TO
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, JANATA BHAWAN,
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

         2:THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
          REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
          M.G. ROAD
          GUWAHATI-781001

         3:THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
          GAUHATI HIGH COURT
          M.G. ROAD
          GUWAHATI-781001

         4:THE LEGAL REMEMBRANCER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF
         ASSAM
          JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
          JANATA BHAWAN
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-781006

         5:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          LABOUR WELFARE DEPARTMENT
          JANATA BHAWAN
                                                                       Page No.# 2/5

           DISPUR
           GUWAHATI-781006

          6:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
           FINANCE DEPARTMENT
           JANATA BHAWAN
           DISPUR
           GUWAHATI-781006

          7:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E)
          ASSAM
           MAIDAMGAON
           BELTOLA
           GUWAHATI-781028

          8:THE PRESIDING OFFICER
           INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
           GUWAHATI
           OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
           KAMRUP (M) DISTRICT
           HENGERABARI
           GUWAHATI-78103




Advocate for the applicant(s): Mr. PD Nair


Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. HK Das
                               Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court
                               Mr. R Barpujari,
                               Standing Counsel
                               Finance Department, Govt. of Assam


                                  BEFORE
                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH


                                    ORDER

22.01.2026 Page No.# 3/5

Heard Mr. PD Nair, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. HK Das, the learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of the Gauhati High Court and Mr. R Barpujari, the learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of the Finance Department, Govt. of Assam.

2. The dispute in the instant proceedings pertains to non-granting of pay parity to the petitioner, who is rendering services as a Registrar in the Industrial Tribunal with that of the Chief Administrative Officer/Sheristadar in the Office of the District and Sessions Judge. Though, initially the petitioner had claimed on the basis of Shetty Commission recommendations, but taking into account the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Gauhati High Court & Ors. Vs. Nozrul Islam Laskar reported in 2025 SCC OnLine Gau 4414, wherein the learned Division Bench has opined that the recommendation of the Shetty Commission cannot be considered/construed as statutory, the question, therefore do not arise upon as to whether the petitioner herein would be entitled to on the basis of the Shetty Commission recommendation.

3. A further perusal of the records reveal that pursuant to the directions passed by the Supreme Court in the case of all India Judges Association and Another Vs. Union of India dated 07.10.2009, the Government of Assam had in exercise of the powers under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India had issued a Notification dated 30.07.2012, whereby the benefits have been extended to the non-judicial staff of the Subordinate Courts in Assam w.e.f. 01.04.2003. It is very pertinent to mention that the benefits mentioned Page No.# 4/5

therein including the financial benefits recommended in the pre-revised pay structure from 01.04.2003 to 31.12.2005 and, thereafter in the corresponding pay band and grade pay as revised in the State w.e.f. January, 2006.

4. It is very pertinent to mention that in the said Notification dated 30.07.2012, the pay structures of the non-judicial staff of the Subordinate Courts have been duly mentioned including that of the Chief Administrative Officer/ Sheristadar in the Office of the District and Sessions Judge. It is also very apposite to take note of that in the said Notification it has been clearly mentioned that the benefit shall equally be applicable to the staffs of the corresponding grade and status working in the various Courts like M.A.C.T/Family Court/Industrial Tribunal/Labour Courts/Court of the Special Judge, C.B.I etc., in Assam which falls within the sweep of the term " Sub- ordinate Judiciary".

5. Therefore, the only question which arises in the instant proceedings is to decide as to whether the post of the Registrar of the Labour Court can be said to be corresponding to the post of Chief Administrative Officer/Sheristadar in the Office of the District and Sessions Judge.

6. It is relevant to take note of that an affidavit-in-reply was filed by the petitioner to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent No.6 wherein at paragraph No.6 the petitioner has mentioned that the nature of duties of the Registrar of the Industrial Tribunals and Labour Courts and the Sheristadar of the District and Session Judges' Court are identical, inasmuch as, there is no Page No.# 5/5

other non-judicial post superior to either the post of Registrar and Sheristadar in the respective establishments. It is also mentioned that the incumbents in the said posts function as the administrative head of the respective establishments.

7. This Court enquired with Mr. PD Nair, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as regards the nature of duties of the Registrar of the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Courts vis-à-vis that of the Sheristadar of the Court of the District and Sessions Judge. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that he would file an additional affidavit by drawing a comparison between the nature of duties and functions performed by the Registrar of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court with that of the Sheristadar/Chief Administrative Officer of the Court of the District and Sessions Judge.

8. Taking into account that the matter has been substantially heard, list this matter again on 12.02.2026 at the top of the list.

9. In the meantime, the additional affidavit be filed on or before 04.02.2026.

10. Liberty is given to the Finance Department as well as the other respondents to file any reply on or before 11.02.2026.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter