Allowed

Gajen Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Jan 2022WP(C)/3646/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging wrongful superannuation due to a recorded discrepancy in date of birth, the Gauhati High Court directed respondent authorities to verify the date based on the service book entry, dispose of the matter within one month, and grant consequential relief regarding salary and reinstatement if verified.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondent to examine the claim, dispose of it within one month, and if date of birth in service book is found correct, pass orders for rectification, reinstatement, and payment of salary for t

Gajen Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010118302021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3646/2021

¶5

GAJEN KALITA

¶6

S/O- LT. HARENDRA KALITA, R/O- VILL- MALANSAR, P.O. NAGARBERA, P.S. NAGARBERA, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN- 781127

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-06

¶9

2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION DEPTT. CHANDMARI GHY-03

¶10

3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DHANSIRI PROJECT DIVISION CANAL NO.1 (IRRIGATION) UDALGURI B.T.R. ASSAM PIN- 784509

¶11

4:THE ASSTT. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DHANSIRI SUB-DIVISION CANAL NO.1 (IRRIGATION) UDALGURI B.T.R. ASSAM PIN- 78450

¶12

Page No.# 2/4

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T DEURI

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 07.01.2022

¶18

Heard Ms. N. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Upadhay, learned standing counsel for the Irrigation Department.

¶19

By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the case projected by the petitioner is that he has been forcefully superannuated on 31.07.2020, before his due date of superannuation. It is projected that the date of birth of the petitioner is 17.10.1962, which is recorded in his service book, but in the order of regularization of service, his date of birth was wrongly recorded as 03.07.1960. In this regard, reliance is placed on the service book (Annexure-G) where against the Clause No.8, the date of birth is mentioned as 17.10.1962. Accordingly, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for rectification of his date of birth and for a direction upon the respondent authorities to reinstate the petitioner in service in the post of Khalasi under the establishment of Dhansiri Project Sub-Division (Irrigation Department).

¶20

The learned standing counsel for the respondents has referred to the order dated 11.08.2021 wherein a direction was issued to the respondent no.2

¶21

Page No.# 3/4

¶22

to produce the original service book of the petitioner. In this regard, it is submitted that there has been a re-structuring of the Irrigation Department and at present the Dhansiri Project Division Canal No.1, Irrigation has been disbanded and the said project is now under the Kaligaon Paneri Division and because of such re-structuring, the service book of the petitioner could not be immediately retrieved and produced.

¶23

Upon considering the entries made in the copy of the service book (Annexure-G) wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is reflected as 17.10.1962, the Court is of the considered opinion that any delay in disposal of the writ petition may be counter-productive to the interest of the petitioner. Accordingly, in order to avoid delay, the Court is inclined to direct the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department (respondent no.2) to examine the claim of the petitioner based on the entry of the date of birth as recorded in the service book (Annexure-G to the writ petition) and thereafter, to consider the representation dated 20.06.02020 (Annexure-E) and dispose of the said representation within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order together with a true copy of the writ petition.

¶24

If upon enquiry, the date of birth of the petitioner is found to be 17.10.1962 in his service book, the respondent no.2 shall pass consequential order for rectification of date of birth in their record and for reinstating the petitioner in service by treating the interregnum period from when the petitioner was superannuated, i.e. 31.07.2020 till his reinstatement as a period during which the petitioner is in service and consequentially he will be entitled to be paid his due salary/wages for the said period.

¶25

Page No.# 4/4

¶26

The writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Gajen Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajen Kalita 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

Dipak Bahadur Sonar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Mrinmoy Kumar Dawka Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Sri Mithangha Basumatary Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Kowsar Ahmed Laskar Vs the Assam Power Distribution Company Limited and 3 Ors.

Subhasish Mukherjee Vs the Brahmaputra Valley Fertilizer Corporation Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Chandrani Bagchi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.