Disposed

Smt. Sabita Das v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Sept 2024WP(C)/2696/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged reversion from Grade-III to Grade-IV post after promotion without prior government approval. Relying on a Finance Department Office Memorandum of 12.03.2004 and similar cases decided by coordinate benches, the High Court interfered with the impugned office order and directed that consequential benefits be decided by the respondent authority in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Impugned office order dated 05.01.2017 interfering with petitioner's promotion stood interfered with; consequential benefits to be decided by respondent authority.

Smt. Sabita Das Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010022072017

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2696/2017

¶5

SMT. SABITA DAS

¶6

W/O SRI KIRAN CHANDRA BORAH VILL- BARAKHAT, CHAYGAON P.O. and P.S. CHAYGAON DIST. KAMRUP R, PIN - 781124, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM and 7 ORS. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY and VETERINARY DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWHATI-6, DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR ANIMAL HUSBANDRY and VETERINARY DEPARMENT ASSAM CHENIKUTHI GUWAHATI - 781003 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 3:THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR ICDP and FSC ANIMAL HUSBANDRY and VETERINARY DEPARTMENT ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 4:THE RESERCH OFFICER R.O. CPBP KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶10

Page No.# 2/4

¶11

5:THE MANAGER GOVT. LIVE STOCK FARM ANIMAL HUSBANDRY and VETERINARY DEPARTMENT ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWHATI -22 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 6:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF SSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 7:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNAL B DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 8:THE TREASURY OFFICER DISPUR TREASURY P.O. DISPUR PIN - 781006 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSA

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.D BORAH, MR.R DOWARAH

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, SC, A.H and V. DEPT., MS. M.M. KATAKI,GA, ASSAM

¶14

BEFORE

¶15

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶16

ORDER

¶17

10.09.2024

¶18

1 . Heard Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M.M. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel for the A.H.& V Department.

¶19

Page No.# 3/4

¶20

2 . By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the office order dated 05.01.2017, by which she has been reverted back to her original Grade-IV post after having been promoted to the Grade-III post, vide order dated 06.10.2016.

¶21

3 . The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the Office Memorandum dated 12.03.2004 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance Department, wherein instructions have been circulated that for promotion to non-gazetted post of the State Government, promotion cases can be cleared by the Appointing Authority, as per the provisions of the Service Rules. The learned counsel therefore submits that in view of the said Office Memorandum, the office order dated 05.01.2017 stating that the approval of the Government has not been taken by the Directorate prior to promoting the petitioner cannot be sustained and therefore should be set aside. The learned counsel further submits that the case of the petitioner at any rate is squarely covered by the decision rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide common order dated 30.05.2019 in WP(C) 774/2017 (Bimal Chandra Nath & 10 Others vs. The State of Assam & 3 Others), WP(C) 2879/2017 and WP(C) 2872/2017. He submits that the same was also relied upon in a subsequent case, vide order dated 07.12.2022 passed in WP(C) 7838/2022 (Mrs. Mira Das & 8 Others vs. The State of Assam & 4 Others). The learned counsel thus submits that similar direction may be passed in the instant case as well.

¶22

4 . Ms. M.M. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, A.H. & V Department on the

¶23

Page No.# 4/4

¶24

other hand has stressed on the fact that as per the impugned office order dated 05.01.2017, promotion has been made without taking into consideration the prevailing rules, regulations and procedures with up-to-date vetted roster register, yearly vacancy position, final up-to-date gradation list, annual confidential report, reservation policy etc. Therefore, it became necessary to issue the impugned order for reverting the petitioner back into the Grade-IV post. The learned counsel otherwise on instructions submits that the Office Memorandum dated 12.03.2004 is in force.

¶25

5 . Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties and upon perusal of the Office Memorandum dated 12.03.2004 and the order passed in other similar cases as relied upon by the petitioner, it is seen that the case of the petitioner is a squarely covered case. Under the circumstance, the impugned office order dated 05.01.2017 in so far as the petitioner is concerned, stands interfered with. The consequential benefit to be given to the petitioner shall be decided by the respondent authority concerned in accordance with law.

¶26

6 . The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Smt. Sabita Das v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sabita Das v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monowar Hussain Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Shamin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Satya Nath Das Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Mrs. Sangeeta Kormel Yadav Vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

Smt. Defola Naiding Vs North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council and 2 Ors.

No. 10245224N Lnk Hemanta Bordoloi Vs the Union of India and Ors.