Disposed

Khayrul Bashar v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Sept 2022WP(C)/2292/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged denial of employment as Programme Associate. Court disposed petition by directing petitioner to file representation with Mission Director for sympathetic consideration and reasoned order within one month. Court declined immediate direction to join service.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to file representation before Mission Director within 10 days; Mission Director to pass reasoned order within one month.

Khayrul Bashar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010056572021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2292/2021

¶5

KHAYRUL BASHAR

¶6

S/O JELHAZ UDDIN, VILL. MILON NAGAR, DURGAMANDIR, P.O. BALADMARI, P.S. AND DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN 783121

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, (ELEMENTARY EDUCATION) DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY 6

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

¶10

ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY 19

¶11

3:THE MISSION DIRECTOR

¶12

AXOM SARBA SIKSHA ABHIJAN MISSION KAHILIPARA GHY 19

¶13

4:DIST. MISSION CO ORDINATOR

¶14

AXOM SRBA SIKSHA ABHIJAN MISSION GOALPARA PIN 78310

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. W RAHMAN

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

B E F O R E

¶19

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

¶20

05-09-2022

¶21

Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department for Respondents No.1 and 2; and Mr. S. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, SSA for Respondents No.3 and 4.

¶22

By communication dated 28^th September, 2005, the District Mission Coordinator, Axom Sarba Siksha Abhijan Mission, Goalpara, granted approval for engagement of three persons as Programme Associates in the District Mission Office, Goalpara, on contract basis for a period of 11(eleven) months as per the terms and conditions to be signed. The name of the petitioner against Roll No.6 appeared in the communication dated 28.09.2005. The petitioner accordingly signed deeds of agreement with the concerned authorities one for 11(eleven) months and another deed of agreement for 11(eleven) months.

¶23

While the petitioner was serving, the petitioner was issued with a show cause notice by the District Mission Co-ordinator, SSA, Goalpara on 1.12.2018 that he has been unauthorisedly absent from duties with effect from 1^st November 2018 till date without any leave petition or any other communication regarding his absence from duties. The petitioner, thereafter, replied by the letter dated 5.12.2018 stating that as there was no deed of agreement signed between the petitioner and the concerned authorities, he has not been attending to his duties. He further assured that he would continue to come to his duties provided a deed of agreement is signed between the petitioner and

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

the concerned authorities. Thereafter, by another letter dated 29.06.2020, the petitioner addressed a letter to the District Mission Co-ordinator, SSA, Goalpara, to permit him to continue with his work despite non-signing of the deed of agreement. However, as there was no positive reply from the District Mission Co-ordinator/Respondent No.4 and as the petitioner was not allowed to continue with his work, the petitioner is before this Court praying for a direction to the respondents to permit him to join and continue in his service as a Programme Associate in the office of Respondent No.4.

¶26

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that it would serve no purpose by keeping this writ petition pending any further.

¶27

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a representation before the Mission Director, Axom Sarba Siksha Abhijan Mission/ Respondent No.3 within a period of ten(10) days from today by annexing a copy of the writ petition along with the annexures appended thereto. Thereafter, on receipt of the representation, the Respondent No.3 shall consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically and pass a reasoned order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the said representation.

¶28

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Khayrul Bashar v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khayrul Bashar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabin Chandra Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Rustam Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Fakaruddin Ali Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Mr. Nabul Islam Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Abdul Malek Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Manoranjan Barman and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.