Disposed

Kanak Chandra Roy v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Jan 2024WP(C)/20/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the delay in his promotion to Assistant Engineer (Civil) on the ground that his qualification equivalence was not recognized initially. The court directed the respondent to consider his representation and pass appropriate orders within 45 days. The writ petition was disposed of at the motion stage.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider representation dated 08-12-2023 and pass appropriate orders within 45 days.

Kanak Chandra Roy Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010294222023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/20/2024

¶5

KANAK CHANDRA ROY

¶6

S/O LATE KABI CHANDRA ROY, R/O PRINCE ENCLAVE, BYE-LANE 1, MOTHER TERESA ROAD, ZOO-ROAD TINIALI, GUWAHATI-781021, ASSAM

¶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 GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (BUILDING AND NATIONAL HIGHWAY) DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM

¶10

3:THE SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS (BUILDING AND NATIONAL HIGHWAY) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM

¶11

4:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (BUILDING AND NATIONAL HIGHWAY) DEPTT ESTABLISHMENT-B BRANCH DISPUR-781006 ASSA

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K CHOUDHURY

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 08-01-2024

¶18

Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel, PWD, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent No. 1.

¶19

The case of the writ petitioner, in a nutshell, is that he is presently holding the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the office of the Chief Engineer, PWD, Assam. The writ petitioner was promoted from the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on 05-12-2023. However, his juniors were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on 16-09-2015. On the earlier occasion, the case of the petitioner was ignored merely because there was a cloud of doubt as regards the validity of the degree held by him, i.e. AMICE(I) granted by the Institution of Civil Engineers (India) in the year 2011. At that time, it was not clear as to whether, that was a degree equivalent to the degree of Bachelor of Engineer held by the other departmental candidates. Subsequently, the aforesaid controversy was resolved and the petitioner’s degree was accepted as equivalent to B.E. where-after, he was promoted.

¶20

The grievance of the petitioner is that his promotion to the rank of Assistant Engineer (Civil) ought to have been counted with effect from the date when his juniors were promoted i.e. 16-09-2015 since his promotion was delayed for no fault on his part.

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

Mr. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel for the writ petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to the representation dated 08-12-2023 submitted by the petitioner before the competent authority ventilating his grievance in the matter. The learned Sr. counsel has also produced orders passed by this Court in similar writ petitions being W.P.(C) No. 7027/2023 and W.P.(C) No. 7006/2023 instituted by similarly situated departmental candidates, with the same grievance, whereby a direction was issued to the authorities to consider their representation. Mr. Choudhury submits that on the basis of such orders of this Court, the representations submitted by those candidates had been considered and their grievances were redressed. Mr. Choudhury, therefore, seeks similar order in the present proceeding as well.

¶23

The learned departmental counsel submits that he would have no objection, if an order is passed by this Court to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner.

¶24

In view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition stands disposed of at the stage of motion hearing with a direction upon the respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 08-12-2023 (Annexure-17) submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate order(s) therein within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶25

Writ petition is accordingly closed.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Kanak Chandra Roy v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanak Chandra Roy 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

Binud Chutia Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Monuj Bhuyan Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Shailendra Kumar Pal Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Bhupendra Nath Deka Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dharani Baishya Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ranjan Deb Vs Mr. Kishore Chakraborty and Anr.