Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

3The Ndrf Assam Rifles C/O Apo vs The Union Of India And 4 Ors on 27 April, 2023

Author: Suman Shyam

Bench: Suman Shyam

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010096662022




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/3405/2022

            TENZING SHERPA
            S/O. LT. PASSANG SHERPA, SERVING AS A HAVILDAR/GD IN THE 1ST
            ASSAM RIFLES C/O. 99 APO, PIN-932001, PRESENTLY ON DEPUTATION AT
            13THE NDRF ASSAM RIFLES C/O APO.



            VERSUS

            THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
            REP. BY THE SECRETARY, THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME
            AFFAIR NEW DELHI-110001.

            2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL

             ASSAM RIFLES
             HEAD QUARTER DIRECTORATE GENERAL
             ASSAM RIFLES SHILLONG-11.

            3:THE COMMANDANT 1ST ASSAM RIFLES

             C/O. 99 APO
             PIN-932001.

            4:THE COMMANDANT 13TH NATIONAL DISASTER RESPONSE FORCE

             ASSAM RIFLES C/O. 99 APO.

            5:G/01110880K WO/GD GOVERDHAN SINGH
             C/O. COMMANDANT 1ST ASSAM RIFLES
             C/O. 99 APO
             PIN-932001

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. S BORA
                                                                                     Page No.# 2/3


Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.




                                   BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

                                             ORDER

27.04.2023 Heard Ms. S. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Deka, learned Central Govt. Counsel appearing for the respondents. Responding to the allegations made in the writ petition Mr. Deka has obtained instructions and submits that it is a fact that adverse entries in the ACRs of the petitioner made during the period 2018-19 have not been communicated to him and therefore, these entries could not have been acted upon by the respondents for denying the promotional/MACP benefits to the petitioner. Mr. Deka further submits that if the adverse entries are excluded then the petitioner would be entitled to benefit of promotion/MACP. However, according to the learned Central Govt. Counsel, the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of promotion with effect from the date on which his juniors are promoted and at the same time, claim the benefit of 2nd MACP as both the benefits are mutually exclusive.

Since the respondents have admitted that the petitioner was wrongfully denied the service benefits based on the uncommunicated adverse entries in the ACRs, I am of the view that the matter calls for re-consideration and appropriate action on the part of the authorities. Ordered accordingly.

The present petition is, therefore, being disposed of by directing the respondent Page No.# 3/3 Nos.2 to 4 to take appropriate steps in the matter for extending the service benefits to the petitioner as per his entitlement under the law, after excluding the uncommunicated adverse entries made in his ACRs for the year 2018-19. The decision of the authorities be notified within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If the petitioner remains dissatisfied even thereafter, it will be open for him to approach this Court once again by filing writ petition. Writ petition stands closed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant