Disposed

Sahadat Ahmed Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC17 May 2023WP(C)/1628/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Gauhati High Court disposed of the matter after the petitioner abandoned challenges against other colleagues promotions. The court directed respondents to consider the petitioners case for Grade-III promotion if eligible vacancies exist.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioners case for promotion to Grade-III post if he is within zone of consideration and vacancies exist.

Sahadat Ahmed Choudhury Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010051742018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1628/2018

¶5

SAHADAT AHMED CHOUDHURY

¶6

S/O- LATE JOYNAL UDDIN CHOUDHURY, R/O- CENTRAL DAIRY CAMPUS, KHANAPARA, GHY- 22

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT, ASSAM, DISPUR, GHY781006

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR DAIRY DEVELOPMENT ASSAM KHANAPARA GHY- 22

¶11

3:THE SUPERINTENDENT TOWN MILK SUPPLY SCHEME KHANAPARA GUWAHATI- 22

¶12

4:HARESWAR SAIKIA JUNIOR ASSISTANT OFFICE OF THE DAIRY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BIRAH BEBEJIA NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782142

¶13

5:NAGEN CH. TALUKDAR

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

JUNIOR ASSISTANT OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DAIRY DEVELOPMENT ZONE NALBARI SARIAHTOLI NALBARI ASSAM PIN- 78133

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H BARBHUIYA

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 17/05/2023

¶21

Heard Mr. N. H. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.M. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, Diary Development Department, Assam, appearing for the respondent no. 2 and Mr. S.N. Krishnatraya, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 & 5. Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, has appeared on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 3.

¶22

It appears from the petition that the writ petitioner herein was appointed as a Grade-IV (Boiler Khalasi) employee under the Assistant Diary Development Officer, Town Milk Supply Scheme, Jorhat on 13/12/1994 and thereafter, by order dated 02/05/2004, he was transferred and posted under the Superintendent, Town Milk Supply Scheme (TMSS), Khanapara, Guwahati.

¶23

The grievance of the petitioner is that although he has been discharging his duties in utmost sincerity and devotion since past several decades, his case has not been considered for promotion to any Grade-III post till today.

¶24

Mr. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that although the petitioner had

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

initially assailed the promotion given to the respondent nos. 4 & 5 to Grade-III, yet, at this point of time, the petitioner’s only prayer is to consider his case for promotion to a Grade-III post, in accordance with the Rules. In other words, the petitioner is not assailing the promotion given to the respondent nos. 4 and 5 in this writ petition.

¶27

Ms. Kataki, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits that the petitioner’s case will be considered for promotion, in accordance with the Rules, if he meets the eligibility conditions. Similar is the stand of Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the State.

¶28

Since the petitioner has given up his challenge to the promotion given to the respondent nos. 4 and 5, it will not be necessary for this Court to go into the said aspect of the matter.

¶29

Having regard to the submissions made at the Bar and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition stands disposed of by providing that the respondents may consider the case of the writ petitioner for promotion to Grade-III post along with other eligible candidates, in accordance with the Rules, if the petitioner comes within the zone of consideration. Since right to be considered for promotion has been recognized as a fundamental right, it is provided that if vacancies in Grade-III position is available, the respondents will initiate appropriate step in the matter, in accordance with the Rules without further delay.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

sukhamay

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Sahadat Ahmed Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahadat Ahmed Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 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

Alim Uddin Laskar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Paban Mech Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

Shri Hiren Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Parmita Deka and 33 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Manjula Bayan and 171 Ors. Vs Monowar Hussain and 49 Ors.

Jiten Chandra Hazarika Vs the Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Ltd. and 4 Ors.