Dismissed

Hiren Ch Borah v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 May 2022WP(C)/1828/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the grand-son of a martyr of the Assam Movement seeking preferential appointment. The Court held that the Rules do not include grand-children as eligible family members and executive resolutions cannot override statutory rules.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as there was no merit because the petitioner's grand-son status did not qualify under the defined rules.

Hiren Ch Borah Vs the State of Assam and 10… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010049132022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1828/2022

¶5

HIREN CH BORAH

¶6

S/O LATE JOGEN CH BORAH, R/O VILL-KAHIBARI, P.O.-BORCHALA, P.S.LAHARIGHAT, DIST-MORIGAON, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 10 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

¶9

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ASSAM ACCORD IMPLEMENTATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006

¶10

3:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ASSAM ACCORD IMPLEMENTATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006

¶11

4:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶12

5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶13

6:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶16

7:THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 8:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MORIGAON P.O. AND DIST-MORIGAON ASSAM 9:THE ADDL. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GEN) ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 10:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MORIGAON P.O. AND DIST-MORIGAON ASSAM

¶17

11:THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES MORIGAON P.O. AND DIST-MORIGAON ASSA

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MD B ISLAM

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CO OP

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 09-05-2022

¶23

Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner is the grand-son of the late Khahuwa Deka, who died during the Assam Movement between the years 1979-1985.

¶24

2. The petitioner’s prayer is to consider the petitioner for preferential

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

appointment to a Government post in accordance with Rule 4-A of the Assam Public Services (Preferential Appointment) Rules, 1999, herein after referred to as the ‘1999 Rules’.

¶27

3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that though the petitioner has prayed for appointment to a Government post, he has not been appointed to any Government post as on date.

¶28

4. Ms. M.D. Borah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 4, 5, 6, 9 & 11 and Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8 & 10 submit that the petitioner’s case can be considered for preferential appointment in terms of the 1999 Rules, provided there is a quota made available for such persons.

¶29

5. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and keeping in view the pleadings, this Court finds that the definition of ‘member of family’ as provided in Rule 2 (d) of the 1999 Rules does not provide for a grand-son or grand-daughter to be eligible to be considered in terms of the 1999 Rules.

¶30

6. Rule 2 (d) of the 1999 Rules defines ‘member of family’ to be a son or daughter of the spouse or a brother or sister of a martyr or a physically disabled person. Though the petitioner’s counsel submits that the State respondents have taken resolutions in meetings to appoint grand-children of martyrs or physically disabled persons of the Assam Movement, for appointment to Government posts in terms of the 1999 Rules, this Court is of the view that such decisions, allegedly made by the State Government officials cannot be allowed

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

to be a precedent, inasmuch as, the decision made by Government functionaries cannot supersede the 1999 Rules, which has been made under Article 309 of the Constitution.

¶33

7. In view of the above reasons, this Court finds that there is no merit in the writ petition.

¶34

8. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Hiren Ch Borah v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hiren Ch Borah v. the State of Assam and 10 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

Manash Doloi @ Manash Doley Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mente Pait Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Hema Nath Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Siemngul Hmar and 27 Ors. Vs Nitin Khade and 2 Ors.

Miss Gitali Borgohain Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Santosh Kumar Choudhury Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.