The State of Assam and 3 Ors v. Gobin Bora

ORDER Date : 25-07-2023 Heard Mrs. RS Deuri, learned counsel for the review petitioners. Also heard Ms. NS Thakuria, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶2The counsel for the review petitioners submits that the order dated

16.09.2022 passed in WP(C) No. 5290/2020 needs to be interfered with, in view of the fact that the writ petitioner has been referred to as a Muster Roll worker in the impugned order, which was made on the basis of the State Government/ review petitioners having referred to the writ petitioner as a Muster Roll worker in the affidavit-in-opposition filed in the writ proceedings. She submits that a mistake has been made on the part of the review petitioners, as the writ petitioner is actually a daily wage worker and not a Muster Roll worker. She accordingly prays that a correction be made in the impugned Order, by referring to the writ petitioner as a daily wage worker and not a Muster Roll worker. She further submits that the correction sought for by the review petitioners would not affect the direction passed in the impugned order, for providing the minimum scale of pay to the writ petitioner, even if the writ petitioner is referred to as a daily wage worker.

¶3Ms. NS Thakuria, learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has no objection to the prayer made by the review petitioners' counsel, so long Page No.# 3/3 as the writ petitioner is given the minimum scale of pay.

¶4On considering the submissions made by the counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that the review petition should be allowed, inasmuch as the petitioner is a daily wage worker and not a Muster Roll worker, as has been mistakenly referred to by the review petitioners in the writ petition. The above being said, para 22 of the Judgment and Order dated 08.06.2017, passed in WA No. 45/2014, had directed the State Government to pay the minimum of the pay scale to Muster Roll workers, work charged workers and similarly placed employees, working since the last more than 10 (ten) years (not in sanctioned post) w.e.f. 01.08.2017. As similarly placed employees mentioned in para 22 of the Judgment and Order dated 08.06.2017, passed in WA No. 45/2014 would also include the writ petitioner, as has been submitted by the learned counsel for the review petitioners, this Court directs the State respondents to pay to the writ petitioner the minimum scale of pay, as provided in the Office Order No. 200 dated 07.11.2019 issued by the Director, Soil Conservation, Assam and the subsequent revision of the said pay scale in terms of the Office Order No. 200 dated 07.11.2019. 5 The pay/arrear pay should be released to the writ petitioner within a period of 2 (two) months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶6The review petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010035282023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oReview.Pet./30/2023o THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORS.o REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.o OFoASSAM,oSOILoCONSERVATIONoDEPARTMENT,oDISPURoGUWAHATI-o6,o DIST.-oKAMRUPo(M),oASSAM. 2:oTHEoADDITIONALoCHIEFoSECRETARY oGOVT.oOFoASSAM oSOILoCONSERVATIONoDEPARTMENT oDISPURo oGUWAHATIo6 oKAMRUPo(M) oASSAM. 3:oTHEoDIRECTORoOFoSOILoCONSERVATION oASSAM oBHUMIoSANGRAKHANoBHAWAN R.G.oBARUAHoROAD oGUWAHATI-o5 oDIST.-oKAMRUPo(M) oASSAM. 4:oTHEoDIVISIONALoOFFICER oGOLAGHAToSOILoCONSERVATIONoDIVISION oGOLAGHAT oDIST.-oGOLAGHAT oASSAMo VERSUSo GOBINoBORAo S/OoSRIoPURNAoBORAoVILLAGEoHOLLOWoGAONoPOoKHONGIA,oPSo DERGAON,oDISToGOLAGHAT,oASSAMo785614,oWORKINGoASoTYPISToCUMo COMPUTERoASSISTANToINoTHEoOFFICEoOFoTHEoDIVISIONALoOFFICER,o SOILoCONSERVATIONoDEPARTMENT,oGOLAGHAT. Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. R S DEURI Advocate for the Respondent : FOR CAVEATOR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA