Nakib Saikia and 19 Ors v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

Judgment and Order (Oral)

Date:25.01.2024 Heard Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N.K. Debnath, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 3, Mr. R. Bopujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department for the respondent no.2 and Mr. A. Hassan, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General for the respondent no.4. 2] This writ petition is preferred by as many as 20 (twenty) petitioners espousing common causes of action. The writ petitioners had rendered their services as Block Development Officers (BDOs) under the Government of Assam till their superannuations, as such, save and except the petitioner no.1 who was promoted and superannuated from the post of Deputy Chief Executive Officer. In Paragraph-3 of the writ petition the various dates of appointments and date of superannuation of the respective petitioners are provided. The detailed service particulars of the petitioners are extracted below: Page No.# 7/23

SL Detail of petitioners Date of appointment Date of Retirement/post Nakib Saikia

29.10 1983 (BDO)

31.08.2020 (Deputy CEO)

¶2Gyanendra Sarkar

14.05.1990 (BDO)

31.03.2020 (BDO)

¶3Pulin Phukan

30.11.1988 (BDO)

31.08.2017 (BDO)

¶4Md. Joyan Ali

05.02.1985 (BDO)

31.01.2018 (BDO)

¶5Labanya Borah

29.01.1986 (BDO)

31.10.2019 (BDO)

¶6Kishore Baruah

06.12.1988 (BDO)

30.09.2017 (BDO)

¶7Syed Mahmood Hassan

22.06.1989 (BDO)

30.06.2017 (BDO)

¶8Tileswar Basumatary

09.09.1983 (BDO)

31.05.2017 (BDO)

¶9Prabhat Kr. Borthakur

20.09.1983 (BDO)

30.04.2018 (BDO)

¶10Atul Chandra baruah

28.06.1983 (BDO)

31.12.2019 (BDO)

¶11Debendra Nath

27.06.1983 (BDO)

30.11.2018 (BDO)

¶12Abdul Rouf Choudhury

05.09.1983 (BDO)

30.06.2020 (BDO)

¶13Munundra

Nath Bhattacharyya

20.06.1983 (BDO)

31.01.2021 (BDO)

¶14Md. Dehnur Ali Ahmed

08.07.1983 (BDO)

28.02.2018 (BDO)

¶15Robin Gogoi

31.01.2017 (BDO)

¶16Haren Borthakur

20.06.1983 [EO (C)]

30.04.2016

¶17Robindra Nath Baruah

¶18Md. Sorman Ali Mollah

23.06.1983 [EO(C)]

28.02.2018 (BDO)

¶19Pradhyumna Borgohain

08.12.1983 (BDO)

31.12.2019 (BDO)

¶20Gangadhar Das

16.12.1988 (BDO)

31.01.2017 (BDO) Page No.# 8/23 During their services, the pay was revised by the Assam Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 2017 [herein after referred to as RoP Rules of 2017]. 3] As per the RoP recommendation, which was accepted by the Government, the grade pay of the BDO's were revised from PB-3, 8,000 – 35,000 with Grade pay 4,700 to PB-3, 22000-87000 with Grade pay 10,900. Subsequently, this pay was further revised from PB-3 8000-35,000 with grade pay 4700 to PB-4, 30,000 – 1,10,000 with grade of 12,700. In terms of the pay revision, the petitioners were entitled to higher pay as per the Fitment Table provided for under the RoP Rules of 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the petitioners were granted the benefit of higher pay scale, the benefit ultimately could not be received by the petitioners because in the meantime they had superannuated from service and the appropriate Fitment Table which was required for giving them benefit as conferred under the ROP Rules of 2017 was not provided for by the respondent no.2 Finance Department. 4] Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners refers to few examples to show that the benefit which has been conferred to the petitioners pursuant to the revision of pay, which, however, could not be received because of the absence of the appropriate Fitment Table. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that representations were filed before the competent authority on various occasions requesting for issuance of appropriate directions Page No.# 9/23 for Fitment Table and the same were also send to the office of the Accountant General in order to that the benefit of the higher pay can be released to the petitioners. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Accountant General has also communicated with the office of the Finance Department requesting for appropriate Fitment Table to be issued in order to grant the benefit of higher pay to the BDOs. It is submitted that subsequently on 02.03.2023 (page-80 Annexure P/23) the Finance Department communicated to the Accountant General in regard to the fixation of pay of BDO on 01.04.2016 that the procedure prescribed under the Case-1A of Appendix-VI RoP Rules of 2017 is to be followed. The said letter also includes the Amended Table 1.18 as per the notification no.FPC/43/2018/3 dated 09.03.2019. Pursuant thereto as the said communication also did not redress the claim of the petitioners, further representation was preferred requesting for fixation from revised pay structure of the BDO's as per the revised notification dated 23.02.2021. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that by notification dated 23.02.2021 the benefit of higher pay order conferred as reflected in the said notification issued by the Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Assam, Finance (PRU) Department. Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the said notification another notification dated 29.07.2021 (Annexure-P/3) was issued, whereby the benefit was to be conferred from Page No.# 10/23

01.04.2021. Subsequently, however, by notification dated 11.07.2022, the earlier notification dated 29.07.2021 was cancelled. By the subsequent notification the benefit was directed to be conferred from 01.04.2016. Thereafter, by a communication dated 14.07.2022 (Annexure-P/11), the Finance (PRU) Department informed the Accountant General's Office thereby allowing the upgradation and fixation of the pay of BDOs with effect from 01.04.2016 and it was provided that the procedure shown as Case-1 A of Appendix VI of the Assam ROP Rules of 2017 may be followed. The amended table 1.8 as per notification dated 09.03.2019 was also enclosed. Subsequently, however, this decision was cancelled by subsequent notification no.FPC.10/2017/129 dated

18.07.2022 This was followed by the Finance Department by its notification dated 13.09.2022 informing the Office of the Accountant General that in respect of fixing the pay of BDO in the Fitment Table 1.21 is to be followed with effect from 01.04.2016. Thereafter, the Accountant General by its communication dated 15.11.2022 requested the Finance Department to intimate the Office of the Accountant General as to which order is to be followed, namely, order dated

14.07.2022 (Annexure-P/11) or order dated 13.09.2022 for fixation of BDOs on revision of pay with effect from 01.04.2016. The said communication also enclosed a comparison of the fixation of pay with effect from 01.04.2016 as per the Fitment Table 1.18 and 1.21 and case-1A for ready reference of the Finance Page No.# 11/23 Department. 5] This was followed by subsequent communication dated 25.01.2023 (Annexure – P/20) requesting for instructions of the appropriate Fitment Table for granting of pay benefits. Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the benefit of revision of pay has been granted to the petitioners, however, referring to some illustrations in respect of how the writ petitioners have been denied the benefit of the revised pay due to the absence of an appropriate Fitment Table, Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Paragraph-29 of the writ petition. Referring to the said chart Mr. HK Das submits that the writ petitioner no.1 Shree Nakeeb Saikia for instance was given the benefit of revised pay of Rs.66,810/- by applying Fitment Table 1.18 as per the RoP Rules of 2017. However, if the Fitment Table

1.21 would have been applied then the benefit of revised pay had been ammounted to Rs.62,770/-, which is less than the benefit earlier conferred by the order of the Finance Department. It is submitted that notwithstanding the repeated representations submitted by the petitioners and the communications of the Accountant General Office, the Department has failed to provide the appropriate Fitment Table and therefore, depriving the writ petitioners from availing the benefit of higher pay scale. Page No.# 12/23 6] Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department submits that the amended Fitment Table of 1.18 has already been provided and as per that Fitment Table, the benefit as required to be conferred to the petitioners are required to be released by the Accountant General's office. Mr. Borpujari by referring to relevant paragraphs of the counter affidavit has submitted as to how the benefit of revised pay scale has been conferred. Mr. Borpujari submits that since the amended Fitment Table 1.18 has been already issued to the Accountant General Office, the benefits as payable to the petitioners should be released from the Office of the Accountant General. 7] Mr. A. Hassan, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General, on the other hand, submits that whatever instructions are received from the Finance Department in respect of the amended Fitment Table, the amount payable to the petitioners will be released. The Accountant General does not dispute that the amended Fitment Table 1.18 has been received and on the basis of that benefits payable to the petitioners will be released. 8] Heard learned counsel for the parties and pleadings on records have been carefully perused. Elaborate submissions of the respective counsel have been duly taken note of. 9] At the outset it is seen that there is no dispute that the pay benefit of the Page No.# 13/23 BDOs has been revised and they are entitled to higher pay scale as per the orders passed by the Department issued on 23.02.2021. As per this order from the existing pay scale PB-3, Rs.8,000 – Rs.35,000 with grade pay of Rs.4700, revised pay structure conferred to the BDOs is in PB-4, Rs.30,000 to Rs.1,10,000 with grade pay of Rs.12,700. Although initially this benefit was to be conferred from 01.04.2021, subsequently, the said benefit was conferred from 01.04.2016. Going by the illustration given in the writ petition, it is seen that the benefit which has been conferred on the petitioners by the order dated

23.02.2021 cannot be conferred by applying the Table 1.18 or the amended Fitment Table 1.18. As per the amended Table 1.18, the benefits conferred on the petitioners for instance in the case of Shree Nakeeb Saikia as per the order dated 23.02.2021 would be Rs.66,810/- , whereas if the amended Fitment Table

1.18 is applied then the benefit which is ultimately conferred to the petitioner Shree Nakeeb Saikia falls below the revised amount of Rs.66,810/-. Likewise in respect of all the writ petitioners if amended Fitment Table 1.18 or 1.21 is to be applied then the ultimate benefits of the revised pay conferred to the petitioner by the order dated 23.02.2201 will fall below the benefit ultimately conferred by the Government. There is no dispute also that any benefit that is granted in terms of the Pay Commission recommendation and accepted by the Government, an appropriate manner for conferring of the said benefit will have Page No.# 14/23 to be provided by the concerned Department, namely, the Finance Department. This benefit which is to be conferred for allowing the beneficiaries to receive the higher pay is by way of an appropriate Fitment Table. The writ petitioners in their writ petition while submitting their representations had also submitted before the Department a Fitment Table (Annexure-P/21), which according to them would be an appropriate Fitment Table for granting the benefits and for the petitioners to avail the benefits as conferred by the order dated 23.02.2021. Under such circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court praying for appropriate order for setting aside and quashing the impugned order dated

02.03.2023 and also for a mandamus to the respondent Department to propose the right Fitment Table for conferring the benefits on the petitioners of the higher pay granted to them. 10] Upon careful perusal of the pleadings available on record along with the RoP of 2017, what not in dispute are the benefits conferred to the petitioner by way of the notification dated 23.01.2021 by the Department of Finance. These benefits have not been altered or withdrawn on the effective date of implementation. Although initially it was made effective from 01.04.2021, subsequently, the amendments were issued making it effective from

01.04.2016. However, these benefits ultimately could not be availed of by the petitioners as there is no appropriate Fitment Table communicated by the Page No.# 15/23 Finance Department to the Accountant General Office enabling the petitioners to be granted the appropriate revised higher scale of pay as per the order of grant of higher revised scale of pay. In the illustration which are presented in the writ petition and the counter illustration which are presented in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents what is seen is that by applying the amended Fitment Table 1.18 with Case 1A and Fitment Table 1.21. It is seen that ultimately benefit of higher pay as recommended by the RoP and adopted by the State was not received by the petitioners as Fitment Table 1.18 would have been applied. Unless the proposed Fitment Table submitted by the petitioners or a similar table which corresponds to the benefits conferred are applied to, this Court is of the view that although the benefits have been conferred the manner as to how the benefit would ultimately be released to the respective petitioners are to be decided in terms of the rates and figures available as per the appropriate Fitment Table. The Fitment Tables, which are stated to be applicable by the respondents are found to be not applicable to the petitioners as ultimately the benefits of revised higher pay scale are not seen to be received, if Fitment Tables relied upon by the Finance Department are applied. At the same time, the proposed Fitment Table which is enclosed by the petitioners by showing it applicable to grant them the benefit of the revised higher pay scale, is seen to be available before the Department and the Department is yet to take Page No.# 16/23 a call on the suggestion. The said representation along with the proposed Fitment Table was rejected by the Finance Department by its communication dated 24.03.2023 (Page-100). The proposed Fitment Table has been placed under: Fitment Table of Revised Pay Structure P.B.-4 Rs.30,000 -1,10,000/- GP-12700 Corresponding to Scale Rs.8,000 – 35,000, GP Rs.-4700 As per Notification Memo No.FPC.10/2017/93 – A dated Dispur the 23rd Feb., 2021/of Finance

(PRU) Department, Govt. of Assam. Stage of pay after 3% increment RoP 2010 PB 8000-35000 Revised P.B. 30000 - 110000 Grade Pay 12700 Total Pay Of which PB pay A B C D 12700 42700 30000 13090 43990 31290 13490 45310 32610 13900 46670 33970 14320 48070 35370 14750 49520 36820 15200 51010 38310

¶815660 5240 39840 PageoNo.#o17/23

¶916130 54120 41420 10 16620 55750 43050 11 17120 57430 44730 12 17640 59160 46460 13 18170 60940 48240 14 18720 62770 50070 15 19290 64660 51960 16 19870 66600 53900 17 20470 68600 55900 18 21090 70660 57960 19 21730 72780 60080 20 22390 74970 62270 21 23070 77220 64520 22 23770 79540 66840 23 24490 81930 69230 24 25230 84390 71690 25 25990 86930 74230 26 26770 89540 76840 27 27580 92230 79530 Page No.# 18/23 28410 95000 82300 29270 97850 85150 30150 100790 88090 31060 103820 91120 32000 106940 94240 32960 110150 97450 33950 113460 100760 34970 116870 104170 36020 120380 107680 37100 124000 111300 38220 127720 115020 39270 131560 118860

The amended Table 1.18 as per Notification No.FPC.43/2018/3 dated 09.03.2019 is enclosed herein below: Amended Table 1.18 Table No.1.18 Stage of pay after 3% increment RoP 2010 PB

8000-35000 Revised P.B. 22000 - 10900

Grade

Pay Grade Pay 10900 Page No.# 19/23 4700 Total Pay Of which PB pay A B C D 12700 32900 22000 13090 33890 22990 13490 34910 24010 13900 35960 25060 14320 37040 26140 14750 38160 27260 15200 39310 28410

¶815660 40490 29590

¶916130 41710 30810 16620 42970 32070 17120 44260 33360 17640 45590 34690 18170 46960 36060 18720 48370 37470 19290 49830 38930 19870 51330 40430 20470 52870 41970 PageoNo.#o20/23 18 21090 54460 43560 19 21730 56100 45200 20 22390 57790 46890 21 23070 59530 48630 22 23770 61320 50420 23 24490 63160 52260 24 25230 65060 54160 25 25990 67020 56120 26 26770 69030 58130 27 27580 71100 60200 28 28410 73240 62340 29 29270 75440 64540 30 30150 77710 66810 31 31060 80050 69150 32 32000 82460 71560 33 32960 84940 74040 34 33950 87490 76590 35 34970 90120 79220 36 36020 92830 81930 Page No.# 21/23 37100 95620 84720 38220 98490 87590 39270 101450 90550 40560 104500 93600 41780 107640 96740

The Assam Gazette, Extraordinary, March 17, 2017 Case-1A: In case the existing Grade Pay has been proposed to be revised to a higher level the following procedure shall be followed-i. Depending upon the pre revised Grade Pay, the relevant table may be located. For example-if the pre-revised Grade Pay is Rs.6400/-, Table No.1.25 is to be followed. ii. The present pay (PB +GP) in column B of the table may be located. If the present pay (PB + GB) is found in the table, that may be selected. iii. If the amount of present pay (PB + GP) fall in between two stages, the higher one of the two may be selected. iv. From the selected stage, one may move horizontally into column 'D'. The amount shown there will be the revised pay in the PB and the revised Grade Pay will have to be added to get the total revised Pay (PB + GP). v. For example :- In certain cases the Grade Pay of Rs.64000/- has been proposed to be enhanced to Rs.66000/- while the pay is revised and the Grade Pay of Rs.15700/- is to be granted instead of Rs.15100/- if an employee is drawing Rs.27080 (PB + GP) on 1.4.2016 his revised pay will be fixed at Rs.66890/- (Pay in the PB Rs.51190 + GP of Rs.15700/-). Case -2 : An employee has reached the maximum of the pay in the pre-revised PB and as per the earlier pay fixation rule he is in the period of two years when one increment is to be held up. The revised recommendation do not contemplate any holding of increment. Accordingly, the said employee will get a fixation as described in the following paras: a. If he has not yet completed one year after reaching the highest of the pay in pre-revised PB, then on Page No.# 22/23 1st April, 2016 his pay will be fixed at certain stage shown in Column-C. He will thereafter get the next stage of pay in revised PB without any hold up. If the next stage is not reflected in Column C of the Table the same should be calculated by multiplying the amount of the previous stage by 1.03 and rounding off the amount to the next ten rupees. b. However, if the next stage calculated in the manner described in (a) above crosses the highest of the revised pay in PB, the increment so calculated shall be given only after following the procedure for crossing the EB as per the recommendation made by the Commission. c. If the employee is allowed increment after crossing the EB he will continue to earn increments in the same manner as described in (b) above. For this purpose the relevant pay band will be deemed to have been extended and the next stage of pay shall be worked out by multiplying the amount of the previous stage by 1.03 and then rounding it off to next ten rupees. 11] Under such circumstances, in view of the discussions made by this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the Finance Department will have to specifically lay down an appropriate Fitment Table enabling the petitioners to receive the benefit of higher revised pay scale which have been conferred by the Department as per the notification dated 23.02.2021. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that this issue needs to be revisited by the Department to the extent of deciding an appropriate Fitment Table which will enable the respondents to be conferred with the benefit as conferred by the order dated

23.02.2021. 12] In that view of the matter, this writ petition stands allowed and the impugned communication dated 02.03.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Department to examine the issue and pass an appropriate order for revising or amending the Fitment Table to enable them to get the benefits of higher revised pay scale as per the notification dated Page No.# 23/23

23.02.2021 and corresponding order rejecting their clams stands set aside. This entire exercise be concluded by the Finance Department as expeditiously as possible within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Once the Department takes a decision and a revised Fitment Table is issued which will enable the petitioners to get the benefits of revised higher pay scale then the corresponding benefits will be released by the Accountant General with effect from 01.04.2016 The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the above. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, are also disposed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/23 GAHC010059742023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1561/2023o NAKIBoSAIKIAoANDo19oORSo S/O-oLATEoDR.oToSAIKIA,o R.O-oHATIGAON,oLNBoROAD,o H.NO-7,oGUWAHATI,oKAMRUPo(M),oASSAM,oPIN-781038 2:oGYANENDRAoSARKAR oS/O-oLATEoNAGARBASIoSARKAR o R.O-oAMBAGAN oWARDoNO-8 o P.O-oTEZPURo o DIST-oSONITPUR o ASSAM oPIN-784001 3:oPULINoPHUKAN oS/O-oLATEoTILOKoPHUKANo o R.O-oSNBoROAD oJORHATo P.O-oJORHATo o DIST-oJORHATo o ASSAM oPIN-785001 4:oMD.oJOYANoALI oS/O-oLATEoMOHAMMADoALIo o R.O-oVILLAGEoBANGALPARA PageoNo.#o2/23 o P.O-oBHASKARoBAZARo oP.S-oHAJOo o DIST-oKAMRUP o ASSAM oPIN-784001 5:oLABANYAoBORAH oD/O-oLATEoBAPUKANoBORAH o R.O-oSIVASAGAR oPHUKANoNAGAR oWARDoNO-14 o P.O-oSIVASAGAR o DIST-oSIVASAGAR o ASSAM oPIN-785640 6:oKISHOREoBARUAH oS/O-oLATEoMANINDRAoKUMARoBARUAHo o R.O-oBIRUBARI oRUPNAGAR oGMCHoROADo GUWAHATI oKAMRUPoMETRO oASSAM oPIN-781016 7:oSYEDoMEHMOODoHASSAN oS/O-oLATEoSYEDoIRSHADoHUSSAIN o R.O-oDURANBASTI oBYEoLANEoNO-12o oFAKHARUDDINoALIoAHMEDoNAGARo oSIXMILEo o GUWAHATI oKAMRUPoMETRO oASSAM 8:oTILESWARoBASUMATARY PageoNo.#o3/23 oS/O-oLATEoBIJENoCHANDRAoBASUMATARYo R.O-oHATIMATHA oKOKRAJHAR oWARDoNO-8o o P.O-oKOKRAJHAR oDIST-oKOKRAJHAR oASSAM 9:oPRABHAToKR.oBORTHAKUR oS/O-oLATEoJADUoNATHoBARTHAKURo o R.O-oKALYANOPUR oPULIBOR oJORHAT o oASSAM 10:oATULoCHANDRAoBARUAH oS/O-oLATEoMILIKoCHANDRAoBARUAHo o R.O-oMORIGAON oTOWN oWARDoNO-4 oM.BoROAD oP.O-oMORIGAON oASSAM oPIN-782115 11:oDEBENDRAoNATH oS/O-oLATEoNAURAMoNATHo o R.O-oCOLLEGEoNAGAR oP.O-oDHUPDHARA oDIST-oGOALPARA oASSAM oPIN-783123 12:oABDULoRAUFoCHOUDHURY oS/O-oLATEoHABIBoALIoCHOUDHURYo o R/O-oVILLAGEoMEHERoPUR oSILCHAR o DIST-oCACHAR oASSAM PageoNo.#o4/23 oPIN-788015 13:oMUNINDRAoNATHoBHATTACHARYA oS/O-oLATEoNAGENDRAoNATHoBHATTACHARYAo o R.O-oVILLAGEoDAKHINGAON P.O-oKAHILIPARA o GUWAHATI oKAMRUPoMETRO oASSAM oPIN-781019 14:oMD.oDEHNURoALIoAHMED oS/O-oLATEoNIZAMUDDINoAHMEDo oR/O-oSANTIPURoPATH oNAoALIo oLICHUBAGAN oNEARoGATTANIoFLOURoMILL oJORHAT oASSAM oPIN-785001 15:oROBINoGOGOI oR/O-oKACHUoGAON o P.O-oPOLIBOR oDIST-oGOLAGHAT oPIN-785621 16:oHARENoBARTHAKUR oR/O-oCHOLADHARAoGYANPITH oJORHAT oASSAM 17:oROBINDRAoNATHoBARUAH oS/O-oLATEoRAMAoKANTAoBARUAH oR/O-oVILLAGEoAGCHIA oP.O-oAGCHIAo(PALASHBARI) o DIST-oKAMRUP oASSAM oPIN-781128 18:oMD.oSORMANoALIoMOLLAH oS/O-oLATEoROSTAMoALIoMOLLAH oR/O-oVILLAGEoMANASPURA oP.O-oLAKHIPUR PageoNo.#o5/23 o DIST-oGOALPARA oASSAM 19:oPRADYUMNAoBORGOHAIN oS/O-oLATEoBALURAMoBORGOHAIN oR/O-oJOYSAGAR oSIBSAGAR oPIN-785665 20:oGANGADHARoDAS oS/O-oLATEoHORIPADoDASo o R/O-oVILLAGEoBARSIDHANIo(SUKILARPAR) o P.O-BAGHNARAoBAZAR oDIST-oBAJALI oASSAM oPIN-78132o VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPRINCIPALoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o PANCHAYAToANDoRURALoDEVELOPMENToDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGHY-06 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARY oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM FINANCEo(PRU)oDEPARTMENTo oDISPUR oGHY-06 3:THEoCOMMISSIONER oPANCHAYAToANDoRURALoDEVELOPMENT oASSAM oPANJABARI oJURIPAR oGUWAHATI-37 4:THEoPRINCIPALoACCOUNTANToGENERAL o(AoANDoE) oASSAM oMAIDAMGAON oBELTOLA oGUWAHATI-o2o Page No.# 6/23 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K NAIR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA