Disposed

Debajit Nath v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Sept 2019WP(C)/6648/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court observed that recruitment matters for the Postal Department fall within the domain of the Central Administrative Tribunal. Consequently, the writ petition challenging language requirements in a Gramin Dak Sevak advertisement was disposed of with liberty to approach the CAT.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to approach Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, and petition disposed of.

Debajit Nath Vs Union of India and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010217092019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6648/2019

¶5

1:DEBAJIT NATH S/O- SRI PHATIK NATH, VILL- PALASHGURI, P.O. NARAYANPUR, P.S. MUSHALPUR, DIST- BAKSA (BTC), ASSAM, PIN- 781372

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1:UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE DEPTT. OF POSTS, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION, GOVT. OF INDIA, SANCHAR BHAWAN, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001

¶8

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL POSTS DAK BHAWAN NEW DELHI- 110001

¶9

3:THE POST MASTER GENERAL ASSAM CIRCLE 4TH FLOOR MEGHDOOT BHAWAN PANBAZAR GHY-1

¶10

4:THE DIRECTOR OF POSTAL SERVICES (HQ) MEGHDOOT BHAWAN PANBAZAR GHY-

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M SARANIA

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶13

Page No.# 2/2

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 06-09-2019

¶17

Heard Mr M Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr S C Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents.

¶18

Matter relates to advertisement to the post of Gramin Dak Sevak in the Postal Department, Government of India within Assam Circle. Referring to the impugned advertisement (Annexure-4), particularly at Serial No. 2 in reference to the State of Assam, Mr Sarania has pointed out that in so far BTC area is concerned the only language prescribed is Bodo to the exclusion of Assamese language, which is the State language. As a result, petitioner whose mother tongue is Assamese and who is conversant only in Assamese language would be excluded from the selection process. This is arbitrary and unreasonable being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶19

On the other hand, Mr Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that in so far recruitment to the Postal Department is concerned, it is within the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench under the Administrative Tribunals’ Act, 1985.

¶20

On due consideration, Court is of the view that subject matter of the writ petition being within the domain of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench, petitioner may approach the Tribunal. Accordingly, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench, and make necessary prayer including any interim prayer.

¶21

With the above observation, writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Debajit Nath v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debajit Nath v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Rajib Kumar Dholua and 11 Ors.

Arup Jyoti Karmakar Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

Sri Bhaben Roy Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Nazmul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Jayanta Kumar Banik Vs Sanjeeb Kr. Das and 3 Ors.

Ajmol Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.