Disposed

Rahman Ali Sk. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Feb 2020WP(C)/571/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Gauhati High Court directed the respondent authorities to verify a claim for arrear salary for a suspension period treated as on duty and release the same within three months after deducting subsistence allowance.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed by directing respondent authorities to verify the claim and release arrear salary for the suspension period treated as on duty within three months after deducting subsistence allowan

Rahman Ali Sk. Vs the State of Assam and 5… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010019692020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 571/2020

¶5

1:RAHMAN ALI SK.

¶6

S/O- LATE UMAR ALI SK, VILL- SAGUNMARI, P.O- BILASIPARA, DISTDHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783348

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM FINANCE (ESTT A)DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006

¶11

3:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 781019

¶12

4:THE DEEO DHUBRI PIN- 783301

¶13

5:THE BEEO BILASIPARA PIN- 783348

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

6:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BILASIPARA PIN- 78334

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N AHMED

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 05-02-2020

¶21

Heard Mr. R. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Elementary) Department and Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department.

¶22

In this petition, the matter pertains to claim of the petitioner for grant of arrear salary for the period from 10.05.2011 to 31.10.2014, which according to the petitioner had not been paid.

¶23

It appears that the petitioner was initially placed under suspension vide order dated 10.05.2011 and a departmental enquiry was held for engaging in certain alleged irregularities.

¶24

According to the petitioner, the authorities, on conclusion of enquiry, held that the charges levelled against the petitioner could not be established and accordingly, the petitioner was reinstated in his original place of posting with immediate effect vide order dated 13.11.2014 and in the said final order, it was also directed that the period of suspension of the petitioner was to be treated as on duty for all purpose.

¶25

According to the petitioner, he has thus been cleared of all charges and final order was issued treating the period of suspension as on duty for all purpose. Accordingly, he is entitled to salary for the aforesaid period from 10.05.2011 to 31.10.2014 after deducting the subsistence allowance already paid to him. However, the authorities instead of several representations to have that effect not released the said arrear salary for the aforesaid period of suspension.

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meantime the petitioner also retired from service on 30.11.2014.

¶28

In that view of the matter, the present petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to verify the claim made by the petitioner and if the aforesaid contention of the petitioner is found to be correct, the authorities will do the needful for releasing the arrear salary for the aforesaid period from 10.05.2011 to 31.10.2014 to the petitioner after deducting the subsistence allowance already paid, which exercise shall be undertaken by the respondent authorities within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶29

In order to expedite the process, the petitioner may also furnish a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of this order to the authorities.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Rahman Ali Sk. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahman Ali Sk. v. the State of Assam and 5 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

Paresh Chandra Mazumdar and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

M/S. S. Ahmed and Co. Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Basanta Kumar Borah Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Kirti Borah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Mehbub Hussain Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Jayanta Kumar Saharia and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.