Writ appeal by a casually engaged Tax Collector cum Road Maharer seeking regularisation in Panchayati Raj Institutions. Following the Division Bench ruling in Upen Das that Muster Roll/work-charged workers are not entitled to regularisation but only minimum pay scale, the appeal was disposed of accordingly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010043432017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/285/2017
BAHARUL ISLAM BARLASKAR
S/O MONOJIR ALI BARLASKAR, VILL. SATKARAKANDI PART-I, P.O. SATKARAKANDI, DIST. CACHAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM and 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVLOPMENT DEPTT., ASSAM SECY., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
2:THE COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. JURIPAR P.O. PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37
3:THE DIRECTOR
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37 ASSAM.
4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-6
Page No.# 2/5
ASSAM.
5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CACHAR P.O. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788001 6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CACHAR ZILLA PARISHAD SILCHAR P.O. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788001
7:SONAI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT SONAI P.O- SONAI DIST- CACHAR ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER CUM BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SONAI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S Y AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
15.02.2024
(V. Bishnoi, CJ)
This intra-court writ appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 07.06.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)
Page No.# 3/5
4204/2015, whereby the learned Single Judge, while deciding the abovereferred writ petition along with other connected writ petitions, had issued the following directions:
12. The above directions would govern the present bunch of writ petitions as well. However, if any claim to engagement and working in Panchayati Raj Institution is found to be not genuine i.e., based on falsehood, question of consideration of such case in the above manner would not arise. However, this must be reflected in the decision so taken.
13. Writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the above directions. No costs.”
Page No.# 4/5
Maharer was put to challenge.
“ 22. It is, however, heartening to learn that the State Government has agreed not to terminate the Muster Roll, Work Charged and similarly placed employees working since last more than 10 years (not in sanctioned post) till their normal retirement, except on disciplinary ground or on ground of criminal offences. The State Government has also agreed to enlist such employees in Health and Accidental and Death Insurance Scheme, which will be prepared in consultation with the State Cabinet. We appreciate this positive stand of the State
Page No.# 5/5
Government taken a s welfare measures for the betterment and security of the employees, in question. We, accordingly, direct the State Government to implement the measures without further delay. Besides this, we, in the light of decision of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148, also direct the State Government to pay minimum of the pay scale to Muster Roll workers, Work Charged workers and similarly placed employees working since last more than 10 years (not in sanctioned post) with effect from 1.8.2017.
23. For these reasons, we are of the view that in the fact situation of the case, Muster Roll workers, Work Charged workers and Casual workers are not entitled for regularization of their services with consequential benefits, such as, pension etc. We, accordingly, subject to our direction in paragraph 22 of the judgment, allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 20.1 2.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge.”
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant's services as a casual Tax Collector cum Road Maharer in a Panchayati Raj Institution could be regularised.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Assam vs. Upen Das & Ors.Followed¶6
2020 (5) GLT 605
State of Punjab vs. Jagjit SinghRelied on¶6
(2017) 1 SCC 148 · Who else cites this
Baharul Islam Barlaskar
The State of Assam
The Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural Development Deptt.
The Director, Panchayat and Rural Development Deptt., Assam
The Commissioner and Secy. to the Govt. of Assam, Finance Deptt.
The Deputy Commissioner, Cachar
V. Bishnoi
Suman Shyam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
