Disposed¶31

Abdur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC11 Nov 2025WP(C)/6226/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arrear salary non-payment; suspension period treated as duty; reinstatement after departmental proceeding; subsistence allowance 50%; representation before BEEO Mandia unanswered; fresh representation directed to Director of Elementary Education Assam via BEEO Mandia; disposal within 4 weeks; writ petition disposed of; costs borne by parties; Gauhati High Court; Robin Phukan; WP(C)/6226/2025; 12.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit a fresh representation (enclosing the writ petition and its enclosures) before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, routed through the BEEO, Mandia; the Director to dispose of the representation within 4 weeks of receipt; parties to bear their own costs. ¶31

Abdur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of arrear salary for the period 07.12.2016 to 31.10.2021 (during which he was under suspension drawing 50% subsistence allowance, later treated as period spent on duty) together with consequential benefits. +1 more

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Though the petitioner had submitted his representation before the BEEO, Mandia, it ought to have been submitted before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam.

¶26

Key takeaways

The writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation, enclosing a copy of the writ petition and the documents enclosed therewith, before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, routed through the BEEO, Mandia.ratio¶27
On such representation being received, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam shall dispose of it within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Robin Phukan, J.), WP(C)/6226/2025, order dated 12.11.2025. The petitioner, arrested on 07.12.2016 in connection with Baghbar P.S. Case No. 296/2016, was placed under suspension on 06.01.2017 by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Barpeta and allowed subsistence allowance @ 50% per month; after departmental proceeding he was reinstated on 26.10.2021 with the suspension period treated as the period spent on duty, but his arrear salary for 07.12.2016 to 31.10.2021 and consequential benefits were not paid. His representation dated 20.08.2025 before the Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO), Mandia failed to evoke any response. Observing that the representation ought to have been submitted before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation, enclosing a copy of the writ petition and its enclosures, before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, routed through the BEEO, Mandia, and directing the Director to dispose of it within 4 (four) weeks of receipt. Parties to bear their own costs.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010238732025

2025:GAU-AS:15272

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/6226/2025

¶6

ABDUR RAHMAN

¶7

S/O LT. NASIMUDDIN, R/O ISLAMPUR, P.O. KADONG, P.S. KALGACHIA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN 781314

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY- 06

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19 3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER BARPETA PIN-781301 4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781301 5:THE BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER MANDIA BARPETA PIN-781308 6:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-0

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J ISLAM, E BEGUM

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, SC, FINANCE

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER

¶15

12.11.2025

¶16

Heard Mr. J. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. N. Phukan, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department.

¶17

2. The petitioner is aggrieved for non-payment of his arrear salary w.e.f. 07.12.2016 to 31.10.2021, as during that period he was placed under suspension and allowed to draw subsistence allowance @ 50% per month.

¶18

3. Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 07.12.2016, in connection with Baghbar P.S. Case No. 296/2016 and he was placed under suspension on 06.01.2017, by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Barpeta and allowed to draw subsistence allowance @ 50% per month.

¶19

3.1. Mr. Islam further submits that after departmental proceeding, the petitioner was reinstated on 26.10.2021, treating the suspension period as the period spent on duty. But, the salary of the petitioner for the aforementioned period and other consequential benefits have not been paid and therefore, the petitioner has filed one representation before the Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO hereinafter), Mandia. But, the same failed to evoke any response.

¶20

4. Though Ms. Phukan, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department, was directed to obtain instructions as to why the salary of the petitioner has not been paid for the aforementioned period, Ms. Phukan

¶21

Page No.# 3/4

¶22

submits that she has not received the instructions and therefore, she has prayed for granting her some more time to obtain the same.

¶23

5. At this stage, Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner on 20.08.2025.

¶24

6. Accordingly, Ms. Phukan, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department, submits that she has no objection in the event of disposing of this writ petition by directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner.

¶25

7. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record.

¶26

8. It appears that though the petitioner had submitted representation before the BEEO, Mandia, yet the same ought to have been submitted before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam.

¶27

9. Accordingly, taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation, enclosing a copy of this writ petition and the documents enclosed therewith, before the Director of Elementary Education, Assam and the same shall be routed through the BEEO, Mandia.

¶28

10. On such representation being received, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, shall dispose of the same within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of the same.

¶29

11. The parties have to bear their own costs.

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

12. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Abdur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alokananda Dasgupta Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Abdul Mutalib Vs the State of Assam and Othrs

Shanta Dey and 92 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Dr Jintu Sarma Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Mukuta Hazarika Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sobnom Sultana Mazumdar Vs the State of Assam