Dismissed

Manju Borah and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Mar 2021WP(C)/729/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners claimed unpaid remuneration for service as Panchayat officials. Court treated case as covered by earlier judgment, directing authorities to verify service and pay due remuneration within three months, then closed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directions to verify service rendered by petitioners and pay due remuneration within three months; petition disposed of.

Manju Borah and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010014052021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/729/2021

¶5

MANJU BORAH AND 9 ORS W/O. SRI RUHINI BORAH, VILL. BEGENABARI, P.O. BEGENEBARI, P.S. SONARI, DIST. CHARAIDEO, ASSAM, PIN-

¶6

2: NAYAN DOIMARI S/O. SRI BINANDA DOIMARI VILL. SARUPATHAR P.O. BEGENABARI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690.

¶7

3: ARUP NAYAK S/O. SRI SUSHIL NAYAK VILL. AIDAUPUKHURI T.E. P.O. AIDAUPUKHURI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 4: SURJYAKANTI PHUKON S/O. SRI RATUL PHUKON VILL. SARUPATHAR P.O. BENGENABARI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 5: RATUL GOGOI S/O. LT. MANIK GOGOI VILL. AIDEOBARIHABI P.O. BENGENABARI

¶8

Page No.# 2/5

¶9

P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 6: KOBITA BURAGOHAIN S/O. LT. REBA BURAGOHAIN VILL. JUTULONI P.O. LONGPOTIA P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 7: DIPIKA KHAKHLARI S/O. RAJIB KHAKHLARI VILL. JALLAH GAON P.O. BENGENABARI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 8: DIBYALATA BARUAH W/O. BULESWAR BARUAH VILL. NA JABAKA VILLAGE P.O. BENGENABARI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 9: JADAB BORAH S/O. HOREN BORAH VILL. BORHULABAM VILLAGE P.O. LONGPATIA P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785692. 10: MONUJ THAPA S/O. LT. RAMBAHADUR THAPA VILL. JALLAH GAON P.O. BENGENEBARI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690

¶10

Page No.# 3/5

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

¶13

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 3:THE COMMISSIONER

¶14

PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037.

¶15

4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER

¶16

DISTRICT OF CHARAIDEO P.O. AND P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690.

¶17

5:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶18

ZILLA PARISHAD CHARAIDEO P.O. AND P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690. 6:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SEPEKHATI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK P.O. AND P.S. SAPEKHATI DIST. CHARAIDEO PIN-785693.

¶19

7:THE PRESIDENT

¶20

4 NO. SARUPATHAR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O. AIDEOPUKHURI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO

¶21

Page No.# 4/5

¶22

ASSAM PIN-785690.

¶23

8:THE SECRETARY 4 NO. SARUPATHAR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O. AIDEOPUKHURI P.S. SONARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-785690

¶24

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B J GHOSH

¶25

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PNRD

¶26

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶27

ORDER

¶28

01.03.2021

¶29

Heard Mr. H. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that the petitioners, who had discharged their duties and functions as President, Vide-President and Members of Sarupathar Gaon Panchayat under Sapekhati Anchalik Panchayat in Charaideo district of Assam have not been paid their monthly remuneration for the entire period of 60 months. They have only been paid their remuneration for 29 months, 19 months and 21 months respectively.

¶30

The petitioner’s counsel submits that a similar matter has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2018 passed in WP(C) No. 7319/2018 and as such, the present writ petition can also be disposed of in terms of the above case.

¶31

Mr. A. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6 & 8 and Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 submit that the present case is a covered matter.

¶32

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. On perusing the order dated 20.11.2018 passed in WP(C) No. 7319/2018, this Court finds that the present case can be

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

disposed of in terms of the above order dated 20.11.2018 passed in WP(C) No. 7319/2018, as the fact situations are similar. The operative portion of the order dated 20.11.2018 passed in WP(C) No. 7319/2018 states as follows:

¶35

“The Government Counsel does not dispute the fact the post is a remunerative post to which the petitioner is entitled to the remuneration fixed under the Rules. However, such payment would depend on his actual discharging of duties. Therefore, if the petitioner had discharged his duties regularly as claimed, there is no reason why he shall be deprived of such remuneration.

¶36

Accordingly, in view of above submissions, this Court is of the view that the present petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities more particularly the respondent Nos. 4 and 6 who will verify as to service rendered by the petitioner as the President of the aforesaid Panchayat and accordingly, if it is found that he had been rendering service as the President, he shall be paid the due remuneration for the period of service rendered by him. The other official respondents will also co-operate in this exercise. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 3 (three) months from today.

¶37

The present writ petition accordingly stands closed.”

¶38

In view of the fact that the present case is a covered case, the respondent authorities, more particularly the respondent Nos. 4 and 6, are directed to verify the service rendered by the petitioners in the aforesaid Panchayat and if it is found that they had been rendering their services as claimed by them, they shall be paid their due remuneration for the period of service rendered by them. The other official respondents will also co-operate in this exercise. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶39

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Manju Borah and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manju Borah and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Kapsanga Vs Charlie Zomawia

Lalrintluangi Vs The Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, Local Administration DepartmentState of Mizoram

State of Mizoram r/b The Secretary to the Government of Mizoram Vs Lalramliana

Dhanjit Nath Vs Deputy Secretary and 5 Ors.

Kamal Das and 4 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Shyamananda Reang Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.