Allowed

Bhupen Bhagawati v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC13 Dec 2021WP(C)/3138/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition addressed the petitioner's claim for regularisation of service from 1991 to 1994. The petitioner worked without a valid post due to administrative lapses, losing salary benefits. The court held the State respondents responsible for the delay and directed regularisation payments.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 2 directed to submit a fresh proposal for regularisation within one week and finalisation within two weeks; salary and benefits to be paid within one month thereafter.

Bhupen Bhagawati Vs the State of Assam and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010092362021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3138/2021

¶5

BHUPEN BHAGAWATI

¶6

S/O LT. SURENDRA NARAYAN BHAGAWATI , R/O GNB ROAD, PANCHABATI, GUWAHATI 781003, DIST. KAMRUP (M)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT., DISPUR 781006

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR

¶10

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VEERINARY DEPTT. ASSAM GUWAHATI 781003 3:THE JOINT DIRECTOR (ZONE) ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT. GUWAHATI

¶11

4:THE SUB DIVISIONAL VETERINARY OFFICER

¶12

NORTH SALMARA ABHAYAPURI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D BARUAH

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 13-12-2021

¶19

Heard Mr. D Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. JK Goswami, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

¶20

The petitioner is aggrieved with the inaction of the State respondents in not regularising the petitioner’s service for the period from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994. The petitioner’s case in brief is that the petitioner, who was working as a LDA in the office of the S.D.V.O, North Salmara was transferred and posted as LDA in the office of Joint Director (Zone) Animal Husbandry & Veterinary, Guwahati vide order dated 13.08.1991. The petitioner joined the said post on 23.08.1991. However, vide order dated 02.11.1991, issued by the Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, the transfer order dated 13.08.1991 was cancelled temporarily until further orders. The petitioner was not given any new posting consequent to the order dated 02.11.1991, till he was transferred from the office of the Joint Director, Guwahati Zone to the office of the District Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Officer, Dhubri as LDA vide order dated 30.11.1994.

¶21

The petitioner’s counsel submits that despite various representations submitted by the petitioner and proposals submitted by the Directorate, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department to the State Government, to regularise the said period from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994, the State Government has not regularised the said period of service till date. The petitioner’s counsel thus submits that the petitioner has not been paid any salary or service benefit for the said period.

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

Mr. JK Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submits that though a proposal has been sent by the respondent No. 2 to the Government for creation of a supernumerary post of LDA in the year 1998 to regularise the service of the petitioner from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994, the same has not been acted upon till date. He also submits that there was a procedural lapse in allowing the petitioner to continue in service as a Junior Assistant under the respondent No. 3, w.e.f. 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994, without getting the order modified. He submits that a fresh proposal will be submitted before the respondent No. 1 for early settlement of the long pending issues pertaining to regularisation of the petitioner’s service period w.e.f 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994.

¶24

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶25

A perusal of the documents annexed to the writ petition justaposed with the averments made by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in their affidavit-inopposition, clearly goes to show that though the petitioner had not been given any post for the period from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994 due to the lapse of the State respondents, the petitioner carried on working in the office of the respondent No. 3.

¶26

The extract of letter No. PI-3034/4271 dated, Ghy. 25^th July, 2005 issued by the Director of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Department, which is addressed to the respondent No. 1 and which is annexed as Annexure-11 in the affidavit of the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 states as follows:

¶27

“ Therefore it appears that Sri Bhagawati was working in the office of the Joint Director, Guwahati zone with effect from 23.08.1991 to 01.11.1991 hanging service in the office of the Joint Director, Guwahati zone due to procedural lapses of the Department from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994.

¶28

Page No.# 4/4

¶29

In view of the above, I, therefore, request Government kindly to create a supernumerary post for the period from 01.1.1991 to 30.11.1994 to regularise the service of Sri Bhagawati as L.D. Asstt. in the office of the Joint Director, Guwahati Zone.

¶30

2) as per query made vide Govt. letter No. viv.64.94.Pt./372 dated 04.10.1999. I would like to inform you that a sum of Rs. 1.00(One) Lakh approximately is required to regularise his pay and allowances etc. for the above mentioned period. The expenditure will be debitable from the Head of Acctt.”2403-A.M. Mon-01 am 001 Direction & Admn. 240 Sub-Esstt. 1. Salary during 2005-2006”.

¶31

The above extract clearly shows that the petitioner has not been paid his legitimate dues due to the fault of the State respondents and that the issue has been hanging fire due to the lapse on the part of the State respondents, to regularise the petitioner’s service period from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994.

¶32

In view of the reasons stated above and as the petitioner should not be made to suffer due to the fault of the respondents, the respondent No. 2 shall submit a fresh proposal for regularisation of the petitioner’s service period from 01.11.1991 to 30.11.1994, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondent No. 1 shall send the same to the respondent No. 1, who shall within a further period of two weeks finalise the said proposal. The salary, allowances and other benefits payable to the petitioner shall thereafter be paid within a further period of one month.

¶33

The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Bhupen Bhagawati v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupen Bhagawati v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anku Mani Kalita and 2 Ors. Vs the Govt of Assam and 10 Ors.

N Shyam Kishore Singha Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sabibor Rahman Vs Rima Trishna Haloi, Acs

Prabha Bala Rabha Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Rupjoutey Das @ Rupjyoti Das Bhuyan Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Bhanu Priya Chetia Vs N Rajathandan, IPS