Gauhati High Court
Sanjit Kumar Das vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 23 September, 2020
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010126962020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 3641/2020
1:SANJIT KUMAR DAS
S/O- LT. SANAT KUMAR DAS OF VILL- RANGBAK PART-II, P.O. AND P.S.
KATLICHERRA, DIST.- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788161
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, P AND RD
DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-06
2:THE COMM. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
P AND RD DEPTT.
PANJABARI
JURIPAR
GHY-37
3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
HAILAKANDI ZILLA PARISHAD
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
4:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
KATLICHERRA DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
P.S. KATLICHERRA
P.O. KATLICHERRA
DIST.- HAILAKANDI
PIN- 78816
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K A MAZUMDER
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PNRD
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 23-09-2020 Heard Mr. K.A. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Roy, learned Standing counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development Department for all the respondents. In view of the nature of relief sought and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself. The case projected by the petitioner, in nutshell, is that he came to be appointed initially as a Tax Collector for a period of 90 days by order dated 23.02.1996 (Annexure-1). He joined in the post on 01.03.1996. By order dated 14.11.1996 (Annexure-3), his service was extended until further order. It is submitted that pursuant to this Court's order dated 26.09.1996 passed in Civil Rule no. 4802/1996, the service of the petitioner was extended until further order by another order dated 13.03.1997 (Annexure-4). The petitioner is presently posted at Katlicherra Gaon Panchayat as In-Charge Gaon Panchayat Secretary under Katlicherra Development Development Block, Hailakandi.
The petitioner states that he belongs to Schedule Caste (Patni) community and the Sub- Divisional Officer, Hailakandi issued a certificate dated 28.06.1982 in that regard. In such view of the matter, the petitioner claims that he is entitled to avail all the benefits as a Scheduled Caste (SC) category employee as per the Assam Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Services and Posts) Act, 1978, as amended. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has submitted all the requisite documents as regards his claim as a member of the SC, his status as such SC Category has not been recorded by the departmental authorities. In this regard, he has referred to the draft Inter- Se Seniority Gradation List of Tax Collector/PRM under provincialised set up of the Panchayat and Rural Development Department issued in the year 2014 wherein his status has been recorded as a General Category candidate. He has further referred to the provisions of Provincialised Employees' Service Orders, 2003. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the said draft Inter-Se Seniority Gradation List, he is shown at serial no. 211. As his status as General category candidate has been continued without making any correction in the draft Inter-Se Seniority Gradation List his chances for promotion are likely to be adversely affected. Making such grievances, the petitioner had submitted a representation on 26.05.2015 before the respondent no. 2. But the said representation was not responded. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted another representation on 25.08.2020 through proper channel in reference to the earlier representation dated 26.05.2020. As his grievances made in the representations have not addressed till date, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition.
It is submitted by Mr. Roy that the writ petition can be disposed of, at this stage, with the direction to the respondent no. 2 to take the representation dated 25.08.2020 of the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner on board and thereafter, the respondent no. 2 shall consider and dispose of the same by way of a speaking order within a stipulated time period by taking into consideration all the attending facts and relevant rules, regulations, etc. Having considered the projection made by the petitioner and upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court considers it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to consider the representation dated 25.08.2020 submitted by the petitioner and thereafter, to pass a speaking order within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of this writ petition with all annexures from the petitioner. The speaking order to be passed by the respondent no. 2, shall be communicated to the writ petitioner forthwith. With the observations made and the directions given above, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant