Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that some of the parties approached this Court by way of a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013. After hearing the parties, this Court passed an elaborate order dated 08.05.2014. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners in these present writ petitions also falls under the combatised category of the Assam Rifles, so they are entitled to the benefits as directed in the judgment and order dated 08.05.2014 passed by this Court referred above.

The learned counsel for the petitioners also further submits that these petitioners though working in different trades, but they fall under the combatised category of the Assam Rifles. So, their places covers by the judgment and order dated 08.05.2014 passed in W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013. The learned counsel also further contended that the matter has travelled upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court who dismissed the plea of the Union of India and affirmed the judgment passed by this Court.

5. In contra, the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that this judgment is not applicable to the petitioners as they were not parties in the W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013 and they are working in different trades though they are Riflemen. He also contended that the entry level qualification is different.

6. After hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the para 5 of the judgment and order dated 08.05.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013, it is clear that in the said judgment, this Court nowhere distinguish the differences in the category and it is an admitted fact that the petitioners in the W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013 belong to the combatised category of the Assam Rifles. Here also in this present petition, it is an admitted fact that the entry level qualification may be different and they are working in different trades like Blacksmith, Carpenter, etc but they are all Riflemen. If it is so, I do not find any reason that why in the present cases, the judgment passed in the W.P.(C) No. 56 (SH)/2013 cannot be applied.

7. Para 5 of the said judgment referred above is reproduced herein below for ready reference:

"5. The Court, in order to satisfy itself, asked the questions i.e. (i) as to whether the present petitioners belong to the combatised category; and (ii) also as to whether the petitioners belong to the members of the Central Para Military Forces? to the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. HG Baruah and Mr. SC Shyam, learned senior counsel for the respondents, unanimously replied that the petitioners belong to the combatised category and they are also the members of the Central Para Military Forces. Further, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India issued another Office Memorandum dated 03.03.1998 wherein, it is stated that the said Office Memorandum dated 22.01.1998 is quite clear and the pre- revised pay scales of the members of the Assam Rifles who belong to the combatised category should also be revised to the pay scales identical to the revised pay scales of HC(RM) in BSF and CRPF. The Office Memorandum dated 03.03.1998 (Annexure-V to the writ petition) is quoted hereunder:-