SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 15539

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J
SMTI BARASHA BORAH BORDOLOI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 OTHERS – Respondent
WP(C)/3723/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J I Borbhuiya, A Hussain, L Mohan
For the Respondents: SC, Excise Deptt., GA, Assam

A penalty under Rule 7 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964, cannot be imposed on a retired employee as they no longer hold a civil post; however, proceedings may continue under Rule 21 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, with pension-related penalties.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Imposition of penalty post-retirement - Rule 7 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 applies only to "Government Servants" holding a civil post; therefore, it cannot be invoked to impose penalties such as withholding increments after the employee has superannuated. (Para 6)

(B) Pension Law - Continuation of Proceedings - Rule 21 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 - Departmental proceedings instituted during service can be continued after retirement, but the permissible penalty is limited to withholding or withdrawing pension or a part thereof, rather than service-based increments. (Para 8, 9)

Issues: Whether the provision of Rule 7 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964, can be invoked by the Disciplinary authority for imposing a penalty after the delinquent had retired from his/her services on reaching the age of superannuation.

Table of Content
1. background of disciplinary proceedings and the challenge to the post-retirement penalty. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. rule 7 of discipline & appeal rules is inapplicable to retired employees. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. post-retirement proceedings must be governed by pension rules regarding permissible penalties. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. final directions regarding existing pension withholdings and disposal of the petition. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)

ORDER

Heard Mr. J. I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I. Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel, Excise Department.

2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has presented a challenge to an order dated 30.04.2025, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Excise Department, imposing upon the petitioner penalty of withholding 1 (one) increment with cumulative effect upon conclusion of a Departmental proceeding instituted against the petitioner vide issuance of a show-cause notice dated 09.11.2020. The petitioner has further prayed for consequential reliefs as would be available to her, upon this Court, interfering with the impugned order of penalty.

3. The petitioner, herein, while working as a Superintendent of Excise, Barpeta, was issued with a show-cause notice dated 09.11.2020 instituting a Departmental proceeding against her, basing on allegations which had surfaced against the petitioner during her tenure of service as a Deputy Superintendent of Excise, Barpeta. Vide the said show-cause notice charges came to be leveled against the petitioner basing on allegation of having permitted the shifting of a IMFL ‘OFF’ wine shop, in clear violation of the provisions of the Assam Excise Rules, 2016 . The petitioner on receipt of the said show-cause notice had submitted an application seeking documents as set out, therein, for preferring an effective reply, however, the said application submitted by the petitioner came to be rejected holding that the documents as sought for by the petitioner had got no relevance to the allegations leveled against her. Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted her show-cause reply on 27.01.2021, denying the charges leveled against her. The said reply submitted by the petitioner not being found to be satisfactory, the Disciplinary authority of the petitioner vide order dated 08.01.2021, directed for holding of an enquiry into the charges framed against the petitioner vide the show-cause notice dated 09.11.2020 and for the purpose, a Enquiry Officer and a Presenting Officer came to be appointed. The petitioner is found to have participated in the enquiry proceedings. On conclusion of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report on 17.08.2021, and the same was forwarded to the petitioner by the Departmental authorities vide a communication dated 17.11.2021. The petitioner on receipt of the said enquiry report submitted her representation against the same on 02.12.2021. The said Departmental proceeding, thereafter, was not proceeded with.

A development had taken place in the matter, the petitioner during the pendency of the said proceedings had retired from her services w.e.f. 31.07.2023, on reaching the age of superannuation. Till the date the petitioner had continued in her services, the Departmental authority had not passed any final order in the Disciplinary proceedings so instituted against the petitioner vide issuance of the said show-cause notice dated 09.11.2020. After lapse of around 03 (three) years from the date the petitioner had proceeded on superannuation, the Disciplinary authority vide order dated 30.04.2025, proceeded to dispose of the said Departmental proceedings instituted against her by imposing a penalty of withholding 01 (one) increment with cumulative effect on the petitioner.

Being aggrieved the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top