Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 13545
GAHC010025892016 undefined IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
WP(C) 5806/2016 Md. Abul Hussain and 13 Ors S/O. Lt. Gadhu Munshi, H. No. 3, Hatigaon, Guwahati In The District Of Kamrupm, Assam.
2: Sri Hashi Ram Boro S/O. Sri Sunnath Boro Vill. And P.O. Tengajhar P.S. Goreswar Dist. Kamrup Assam.
3: Md. Akkash Ali S/O. Md. Arab Ali Vill. Natbama Hatigaon P.O. And P.S. Dispur Guwahati Dist. Kamrupm Assam.
4: Md. Manjur Ahmed S/O. Lt. A. Latif Vill. And P.O. Thakurbari P.S. Rangapara Dist. Sonitpur Assam.
5: Sri Akan Borah S/O. Lt. Bhadra Kt. Borah Vill. And P.O. Behali Dist. Sonitpur Assam.
6: Md. Akshed Ali Ahmed S/O. Lt. Jahiruddin Ali Vill. Mukundapur P.O. Bhagpur P.S. Goreswar Dist. Kamrup Assam.
7: Md. Danish Ali S/O. Md. Jainul Abedin Vill. Gauhigaon P.O. And P.S. Sootia Dist. Sonitpur Assam.
8: Md. Matleb Ali S/O. Md. Tyeb Ali Vill. Barkuriha P.O. Titkuri P.S. Rangia Dist. Kamrup Assam.
9: Sri Jogeswar Boro S/O. Sri Joni Ram Boro Vill. And P.O. Tengajhar P.S. Goreswar Dist. Kamrup Assam.
10: Sri Nabin Ch. Kalita S/O. Hahi Ram Kalita Vill. Balabari P.O. Tengajhar P.S. Goreswar Dist. Kamrup Assam.
11: Sri Bharat Borah S/O. Lt. Jiban Borah Vill. Kalibari P.O. And P.S. Tezpur Dist. Sonitpur Assam.
12: Md. Babul Ali S/O. Md. Mahbub Ali Vill. Nurour P.O. And P.S. Sootia Dist. Sonitpur Assam.
13: Md. Kamal Hussain Mullah S/O. Lt. Poyar Uddia Mullah R/O. Ward No. 11 Bahaglur Tari P.O. A.M.Co. Road Dhubri Dist. Dhubri Assam.
14: Sri Bhabananda Saikia S/O. Sri Bhairab Saikia R/O. Bhairab Nagar P.O. And P.S. Tezpur Dist. Sonitpur Assam ...............................Petitioners VERSUS The State Of Assam And Anr Rep. By The Comm. And Secy. to The Govt. Of Assam, Deptt. Of Home, Dispur, Guwahati -781006 In The District Of Kamrupm, Assam.
2:The Superintendent Of Police Vigilance And Anti-Corruption Assam Srimantapur Guwahati -781032 In The District Of Kamrup-(M)
Assam ....Respondents Advocates for the Petitioners: Mr. S. Kataki, Advocate, Advocates for the respondents : Mr. T.C. Chutia, Advocate for the respondents B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
ORDER
05.12.2024 Heard Mr. S. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T.C.
Chutia, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondents.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioners, 14(fourteen) in numbers, have challenged the initiation of Regular Enquiry bearing no. 23(4)2015 by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Assam, against the petitioners and also the vide letter No. DGVA/RI/2016/2217 dated 27.07.2016, whereby, the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Assam, has directed the Executive Engineer, Tezpur Division (Irrigation) to send the petitioners for deposing their statements and verification of documents in connection with regular enquiry suspecting the petitioners for misappropriation of Govt. money, on the ground that the same is illegal and in violation of the judgment and order dated 04.09.2009 passed in WP(C) 5580/2002.
3. It is the contention of the petitioners that the petitioners were appointed to the post of Grade-III and Grade-IV under the Tezpur (Irrigation) Division, Tezpur, pursuant to the advertisement dated 23.08.1998 issued by the Executive Engineer, Tezpur Division (Irrigation). The appointments were made after oral interview by the competent authority.
4. After the appointment of the petitioners, while they petitioners were serving no salaries were paid. Being aggrieved they approached this Court by filing a writ petition which has been registered as WP(C) 5580/2002 for payment of salary. This Court on 04.09.2009 allowed the writ petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to pay the salary of the petitioners from the date of their joining by holding that the petitioners are entitled to 50% of the pay and allowances for the period prior to 06.09.2002 since their appointment and also entitled the regular payment of their salary from 06.09.2002. The appointment of the petitioners were held to be not de-hors the rules rather a case of procedural lapses on the part of the respondent authorities for which the petitioners cannot be deprived for such lapses and further held that the action of the respondent authorities illegal.
5. Against the aforesaid judgment and order dated 04.09.2009, a writ appeal was filed by the state respondents for which miscellaneous case being MC No. 1755/2010 was filed for condonation of 172 days in filing the said appeal.
However, the same was dismissed on 22.02.2011 by the Division Bench.
6. It is contended that after the judgment and order dated 04.09.2009, the petitioners were paid the arrear salaries and their services were confirmed by the competent authorities.
7. Thereafter, an impugned regular enquiry was initiated being Regular Enquiry No. 23(4)/2015 by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti- Corruption, Assam, against the petitioners. Vide impugned letter No. DGVA/RI/2016/2217 dated 27.07.2016, Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Assam, has communicated a letter to the Executive Engineer, Tezpur Division (Irrigation), Tezpur and directed to send the suspect persons/petitioners to the office of the Director General of Vigilance & Anti- Corruption, Assam, for depositions of their statements and verification of documents. Being aggrieved this writ petition is filed.
8. Mr. S. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the initiation of Regular Enquiry No. 23(4)/2015 by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Assam, and consequential letter dated 27.07.2016 directing the petitioners for recording their statements and verification of documents are illegal inasmuch as, the allegation against the petitioners is of misappropriation of Govt. money and the Hon’ble High Court has already held that the initiation is against the judgment and order dated 04.09.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 5580/2002, wherein, the appointments of the petitioners have been held to be in accordance with law. Therefore, the initiation of Regular Enquiry as well as the im
