Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/8 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 17 March, 2026
Page No.# 1/8
GAHC010145442017
2026:GAU-AS:4057
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6503/2017
PRADIP RAJBONGSHI @ PRADIP CH. RAJBONSHI
S/O LT. GUNESWAR RAJBONGSHI R/O SANDHELI, P.S. BELSOR, P.O.
HARIBHANGA, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM and 3 ORS.
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME AND
POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI -6.
2:THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI -6.
3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI -6.
4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL DEFENCE AND COMMANDANT
GENERAL OF HOME GUARDS
ASSAM
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI -28
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P K SARMA, MS.B BHUYAN,MS.B MAHANTA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/8
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
ORDER
Date : 17-03-2026 Heard Mr. P.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondents.
2. The grievance raised by the petitioner in the present proceeding is for a direction upon the respondent authorities to reinstate him in his service along with consequential benefits in either of the two Assam Industrial Security Force (AISF) Battalions, created by the respondent authorities for accommodating persons similarly situated like the petitioner, herein, who were initially engaged in the Assam Tea Plantation Security Force.
3. The State respondent had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Indian Tea Association, with regard to raising of the Assam Tea Plantation Security Force (in short 'ATPSF'), for the purpose of providing the security to the various tea gardens functioning in Assam. The recruitment of personnel of the said force was to be made by the State respondents, however, the expenditure involved, including the salaries of the personnel so recruited, was to be borne by the respective tea gardens. For the purpose of operationalizing the said force, it was provided that the provisions of the Assam Home Guards Act, 1947 would be applied. The petitioner contends that after setting up of the said force, he was engaged by the respondent authorities as a personnel in the ATPSF. The petitioner also contends that for the different duties discharged by him, which also included duties requiring handling of arms and ammunitions, he was issued with a Page No.# 3/8 command certificate by the respondent. The petitioner during his such engagement in the said force was alleged to have been involved in a criminal case. An FIR was lodged in the matter on 30-06-2001, before the Officer-in-Charge, Bihali Police Station, wherein, it was alleged that the petitioner along with others had committed dacoity by snatching away Rs. 8,20,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Twenty Thousand) from the informant. The said case was registered under Section 395/ 397 IPC, against the petitioner, herein.
4. The petitioner projects that after registration of the said FIR, the competent authority of the force had asked the petitioner not to continue in his services w.e.f. 12-12- 2003. It is projected that the petitioner, complying with the directions issued to him, had not attended his duties after 12-12-2003. The services rendered by the petitioner from 30-11-1993 to 12-12-2003, is sought to be established from a certificate issued by the Commandant of the ATPSF, which is stated to have been issued on 05-11-2005.
5. In pursuance to the proceeding instituted before this Court by persons similarly situated like the petitioner who continued to serve in the force, this Court in the case of All Assam Tea Plantation Security Force Welfare Committee Vs. State of Assam & Ors. reported in 2002 (2) GLT 55, proceeded to direct the respondent authorities to examine the question as to whether further continuance of the force in future would be necessary and if so to give permanent status along with consequential time scale of pay to such members of the force who may be in service as on date of the order.
6. The direction passed being relevant is extracted, here-in-below:-
"(9) Consequently, for the reasons alluded in the foregoing paragraphs, this writ petition has to be allowed. The State respondents will now examine the Page No.# 4/8 question as to whether further continuance of the force in the future would be necessary and if so, to give permanent status along with consequential time scale of pay to such members of the Force who may be in service as on date. The existing frame work under which the Force continue to operate will naturally have to undergo certain structural changes at the hands of the authority. If, however, the continuance of the Force raises any room for doubt and speculation in the minds of the authority, the concerned State authorities will ensure continuance of the employment of the members of the Force till such time that the Force remains in operation and simultaneously embark upon a package of phased rehabilitation of the members of the force. The directions in favour of the members of the Force, as hereinabove, is naturally subject to their being found fit and eligible for continuance in active service. No time limit has been fixed to compel performance of the obligations cast upon the State authorities by this order as this Court sees no reason as to why the authorities will not carry out such obligations within a reasonable time."
7. In terms of the said directions passed, the Government arrived at a decision to create a new force in the name and style "Assam Tea Plantation & Industrial Security Force". In terms of the decision arrived at, two Battalions were to be formed, with a strength of each of the said Battalions being 1326 numbers of personnel and the post creation for the purpose was to be done by the Government. Insofar as the personnel working in the Assam Tea Plantation Security Force (ATPSF) are concerned, their cases were decided to be so examined by a Board to be constituted in the matter by the Government and the Board upon screening such members of the force with regard to their suitability for continuing in their services, would select them and they would be subsequently deputed for training. On completion of their respective training, such personnel selected by the said Board would be absorbed in the newly created Battalions. Thereafter, the Government of Assam in terms of the decision arrived at, created two Battalions in the name and style "No. 3 Assam Industrial Security Force Battalion" and "No. 4 Assam Industrial Security Force Battalion", to absorb the eligible personnel of Page No.# 5/8 Assam Tea Plantation Security Force (ATPSF), under a permanent structure.
8. They personnel of the ATPSF, who were selected, after screening, were deputed to undergo the prescribed training and the personnel who successfully completed their respective training came to be absorbed in the newly raised Battalions of the Assam Industrial Security Force (AISF). It is further projected that on conclusion of the process involved around 2571 (Two Thousand Five Hundred Seventy One) personnel of ATPSF came to be absorbed in the AISF. The petitioner, however, has not projected in the present writ petition that he had also submitted his candidature for absorption against the two Battalions created vide order dated 22-04-2008, in terms of the decision arrived at by the Government in the matter.
9. The criminal proceeding instituted against the petitioner was proceeded with and after conclusion of the trial, the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 30-09-2016 proceeded to acquit the petitioner from the charges framed against him, therein. The petitioner, on being acquitted from the criminal proceeding pending against him proceeded to submit a representation dated 06-04-2017 before the Commandant, AISF praying for his reinstatement in service and for granting permanency along with consequential time-scale of pay. The said representation, however, was not favourably considered. .
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents have reiterated the existing facts as noticed, hereinabove. The facts narrated, hereinabove, would reveal that the petitioner on being asked not to continue in his services in the force w.e.f. 12-12-2003, had not assailed such directions issued to him Page No.# 6/8 by the authorities of the Assam Tea Plantation Security Force (ATPSF), wherein he, at the relevant point of time, was engaged. The petitioner is not found to have raised any grievance in the matter proximate to the time when he was prevented from continuing in the service in ATPSF. The petitioner had for the first time after 12-12-2003 approached the authorities praying for reinstatement in his service only on submitting his representation dated 06-04-2017, i.e. the petitioner had approached the respondent authorities after 14 (fourteen) years from the date when he was prevented from continuing with his engagement in the ATPSF. The delay occasioning in approaching the respondent authorities and/ or this Court for redressal of his grievances is not explained in the writ petition.
11. As noticed, hereinabove, the procedure having been put in place for the purpose of absorption of the service of the personnel engaged in ATPSF in the two newly raised Battalions of Assam Industrial Security Forces, the petitioner in the present writ petition has also not brought on record any material to demonstrate that he had offered his candidature for such absorption, but was not considered for the purpose for reasons that may be known to the respondents. The petitioner has been found to have kept away from the said process initiated in the matter while his erstwhile colleagues in the ATPSF had participated in the said process and they on being found to be suitable for absorption in the two newly created Battalions of Assam Industrial Security Force were duly absorbed and subsequently also authorized a scale of pay along with other benefits that would flow to the police personnel working in the normal police force of the State. The process as put in place for absorption of the earlier employees of ATPSF in the newly created two Page No.# 7/8 Battalions of AISF was an onetime measure to raise the two newly created forces and the petitioner not having participated in the said process, this Court, at this stage, would not direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for such absorption, inasmuch as, the posts available in the said two newly created Battalions of AISF, after the initial recruitment effected against it, would be required to be filled up by way of open advertisement. The petitioner is found to have missed out an opportunity available to him at the relevant point of time when the process of absorption of personnel in the newly created Battalions of AISF were undergone.
12. As noticed, hereinabove, it is an admitted position that the petitioner was not in service after 12-12-2003 and with regard to such discharge of the petitioner, he had not raised any grievance, till the submission by him of a representation on 06-04-2017, praying for reinstatement in service and thereafter, instituting the present proceeding, before this Court. The petitioner projects that after his discharge from service w.e.f. 12- 12-2003, he was pursuing the criminal proceeding instituted against him and after conclusion of the same, he had approached the authorities praying for his reinstatement. The said ground would not mandate an acceptance, inasmuch as, the subsequent acquittal of the petitioner in the criminal case, would be of no relevance in considering the discharge of the petitioner from his service, which had already attained finality.
13. In view of the above discussions, this Court is of the considered view that a direction for reinstatement of the petitioner in his services, would not be permissible to be so issued after lapse of more than 22 (twenty two) years from the date when the petitioner was ousted from the ATPSF. Accordingly, the claims made in the present writ Page No.# 8/8 petition by the petitioner would not mandate an acceptance from this Court.
14. In view of the conclusions reached by this Court, hereinabove, the present writ petition is held to be devoid of any merit and the same is, accordingly, set aside. However, there would be no order as to cost.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant