Back
2023 Supreme(Gau) 1044
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Sandeep Mehta, Susmita Phukan Khaund, JJ.
Salam Uddin Khan, S/o Aftab Uddin Khan – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam, Power (Electricity) Department, Dispur And Ors. – Respondents
WA/127/2023
Decided On : 15-09-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. T. Som
Headnote:
Writ Appeal - Recruitment process – Held, appellant failed to agitate when he was not short-listed to appear for his written-examination to be selected as Office-cum-Field Assistant/Sahayak/Mali. Although the appellant has averred that his candidature for the post was illegally rejected in a clandestine manner, he did not agitate against such action of the respondent authorities. The controversy whirls around fact that services of appellant were abruptly retrenched in year 2021 despite the fact that he was continuously rendering his services since year 2012. His counterparts have however been regularized. Appellant has failed to substantiate the allegation of discriminatory approach by the authorities or that there was any scheme of the Department for regularization of Muster Roll workers - The fate of letter relating to the regularization of appellant is also not known - Appellant is willing to continue to work even on contractual basis - The appellant has however not impleaded his co-workers as parties in Writ Petition as well as in this appeal - Nothing has been brought on record to show how the appellant has been prejudiced by not being treated at par with his counterparts - It is not clear under what terms and on what basis appellant’s salary was deposited in his co-workers bank accounts and not credited to his own account without any protest being raised - Without any material being placed on record, this issue cannot be considered in this appeal - Writ appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Susmita Phukan Khaund, J.
Heard Mr. R P Sarmah, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant. Also heard Mr B Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, APDCL.
2. This appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 08.08.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 6236/2021. The appellant, in this case is Salam Uddin Khan. The State of Assam, the Assam Power Distribution Company Limited, the Chairman, the Sub-Divisional Engineer (Electrical), Dhubri, the Assistant General Manager (Electrical), Dhubri, are arrayed as respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively.
3. Brief facts of this case are that the appellant was engaged as a Muster Roll Worker by the respondents in place of one Shri Indrajit Das, since September 2012. However, neither any appointment letter was issued nor was any agreement signed for the said appointment and the appellant was appointed without following any recruitment process. The respondent No. 4, vide letter dated 25.10.2013 (Annexure-3 of the Writ Petition) communicated to the respondent No. 5 that as the appellant was working as an outsourced Meter Reader since September 2012, in absence of Shri Indrajit Das, and as his performance was satisfactory, he could be appointed in place of Shri Indrajit Das. The respondent No. 5 had accordingly asked the respondent No. 4 to submit details with address/particulars of the appellant against the said proposal of respondent No. 4 and the same was submitted vide letter dated 05.11.2013 to the respondent No. 5. Furthermore, the respondents, more particularly, the respondent No. 2, vide employment Notice No. MD/APDCL/HR/REC(2017-18)/85/120 dated 14.08.2018, published an advertisement for appointment to the post of Office-cum-Field Assistant/Sahayak/Mali. As the appellant claimed to be possessed of work experience as per the job description, he applied for the aforementioned post and upon applying, the status for his application was shown as “Success”. The written examination was conducted on 28.04.2019, but no call letter was issued to the appellant. When the appellant querried about the written examination in the month of March, 2020, the respondents handed over a notice dated 10.02.2020 and through that notice, the appellant learnt that the examination had already been conducted on 28.04.2019 and the document verification was held on 24.02.2020. The respondent authorities informed the appellant that there are still sufficient vacancies available in the department and further he was asked to continue working as before and to stay vigilant for further advertisements to be published in the near future.
4. It is averred that the candidature of the appellant was illegally and in a clandestine manner, rejected by the respondent authorities without issuance of a call letter. When the appellant questioned about the reasons for not calling him for the aforementioned examination, he was handed over a letter dated 07.12.2018 (Annexure-13), wherein, it was mentioned that only experienced candidates with wage payment record were allowed to sit for the written examination. The appellant then realized that, from the first month of his engagement as a Muster Roll Worker, the respondent authority credited his salary in the bank accounts of his co-workers. As there was no wage payment record in his name, he was unjustly deprived of the opportunity of regularization of his services. It was not mentioned in the advertisement dated 14.08.2018 that, there was any requirement of wage payment record of the applicants. Some of his colleagues have been regularized in terms of the selection process conducted on the basis of the advertisement dated 14.08.2018 and others are still working as muster roll workers.
5. The appellant claims that although he was discharging his duties sincerely, his salary was not credited to his account, instead his salary was always credited to the accounts of other co-workers, namely, Probir Sarma, Anuj Kr. Deb, Sheikh Abdullah
