Disposed

Hemanta Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Mar 2024WP(C)/1285/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Assistant Engineer in PWD sought consideration for promotion with retrospective effect from the date his junior was promoted, after initially being denied promotion over equivalence of his AMICE qualification. The Court, on consensus, directed respondent No. 2 to consider and decide his pending representation by a reasoned order within four weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Hemanta Kumar Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010045692024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1285/2024

¶5

HEMANTA KUMAR KALITA

¶6

S/O LATE GOBINDA KALITA, R/O PUB RANGIA MURARA MILANPUR, P.O.RANGIA, KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781354

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006, ASSAM

¶9

2:THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT (ROADS) DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 3:THE SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 4:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT ESTABLISHMENT-B BRANCH DISPUR-781006 ASSA

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

¶13

:: O R D E R ::

¶14

06-03-2024

¶15

Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 as well as Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel, PWD, for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

¶16

The writ petitioner herein is presently serving as Assistant Engineer (Civil) PWD, on being promoted by Notification dated 31-10-2023. The petitioner was initially denied promotion by the Department on the ground that the qualification of “Section A&B of Associate Membership Examination AMICE (I) in Civil Engineering” from the Institution of Civil Engineers (India), Ludhiana, Punjab was not equivalent to B.E. degree and hence, the educational qualification of the petitioner was put to question.

¶17

Similarly situated persons had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 7944/2022, which was disposed of by order dated 09-12-2022, directing the authorities to pass a reasoned order on the claim of those petitioners for promotion. Thereafter, the petitioners in WP(C) No. 7944/2022, who were junior to the petitioners having the same qualification and from the same institute were considered for promotion and have been duly promoted to the rank of Assistant Engineers.

¶18

Page No.# 3/3

¶19

The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that his case has to be considered by giving retrospective effect from the date when his immediate junior was promoted.

¶20

The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made a representation on 08-11-2023 before the respondent No. 2, i.e., Special Commissioner and Special Secretary to the Government of Assam, PWD (Roads), Assam, however, the same has not been considered yet and, therefore, the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is given to the respondent No. 2 to consider and dispose of the representation.

¶21

Ms. A. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate as well as Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel, PWD, have no objection to the prayer so made.

¶22

Accordingly, on consensus, this writ petition is disposed with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to consider and dispose of the representation dated 08-112023 submitted by the petitioner by a reasoned order and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶23

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Hemanta Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Hemanta Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pranab Kalita and 16 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Shahadat Hussain Mollah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Shahadat Hussain Mollah Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Rupton Daimari Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Pranjit Das and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Tapan Barua and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.