Bishnu Deo Roy v. Rakesh Kumar, I.A.S. and 3 Ors

ORDER

20.02.2024 (V. Bishnoi, CJ)

This Contempt Petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that the respondents have not complied with the directions given by this Court in WP(C) 2395/2011, decided on

01.12.2015 and later on affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 191/2017 vide order dated 07.11.2022. In response to the Contempt Petition, the respondents have filed counter wherein it is contended that the order dated 01.12.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 2395/2011 has already been complied with and pursuant to the order of the learned Single Judge, a Common Gradation List was prepared. It is further contended that the petitioner's name appeared at Sl. No. 3 in the said gradation list. However, after the promotion of the petitioner Shri Bishnu Deo Roy on 22.11.2023 as Senior Assistant, no vacancy arose in the cadre of Superintendent till his retirement and the petitioner had also not completed 7 years of service as Senior Assistant for being considered for promotion, which is a condition laid down in the Assam Directorate (Ministerial) Service Rules, 1973 and, therefore, the petitioner was not even eligible for promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the order passed by the Page No.# 3/3 respondent authority on 13.06.2023 denying promotion to the petitioner is illegal and not in accordance with law. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge, vide order dated 01.12.2015, directed the respondents to treat the Ministerial staff serving in the offices of Chemical Examiner (Excise) and Joint Commissioner of Excise as part of the ministerial staff of the establishment of Commissioner of Excise and further directed to prepare a cadre wise common gradation list of the ministerial staff. Having gone through the order dated 13.06.2023, we are of the view that substantial compliance of the order dated 01.12.2015, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 2395/2011, has been done. In such circumstances, no further order is required to be passed in this Contempt Petition. The same is therefore dismissed. Notices discharged. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13.06.2023 passed by the respondent authority, he is free to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law to challenge the said decision of the respondents.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010089422023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCont.Cas(C)/266/2023o BISHNUoDEOoROYo S/O-oLATEoRAMoBIRAJEEoROY,o R/O-oBIRKUCHI,o P.O.-oNARENGI,oP.O.-NARENGI,o GUWAHATI-20,oKAMRUP(M),oASSAM. VERSUSo RAKESHoKUMAR,oI.A.S.oANDo3oORSo THEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARY,o GOVERNMENToOFoASSAM,o EXCISEoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,o GUWAHATI-o781006. 2:KAMALoKUMARoBAISHYA oACS oTHEoSECRETARYoOFoEXCISEo GOVERNMENToOFoASSAMo EXCISEoDEPARTMENT oDISPURo GUWAHATI-o781006. 3:RAKESHoAGARWAL oI.A.S. oTHEoCOMMISSIONERoOFoEXCISEo HOUSEFEDoCOMPLEX oDISPURo GUWAHATI-o781006 oASSAM. 4:SANJIBoKUMARoMEDHI oA.C.S. oTHEoJOINToCOMMISSIONERoOFoEXCISEo(EIB) Page No.# 2/3 HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B D DAS Advocate for the Respondent : MR. P N GOSWAMI (r-3,4) BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM