Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010101802024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2705/2024 ALI HAIDOR BARBHUIYA S/O- LATE MASHROF ALI BARBHUIYA, VILL- NEARGRAM PT-I, P.O. NEARGRAM, DIST.- CACHAR (ASSAM) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE ASSAM ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37 4:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SOUTHERN ASSAM CIRCLE SILCHAR-01 5:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER KARIMGANJ DIVISION KARIMGANJ PIN- 78871 Page No.# 2/7 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R CHOUDHURY, MS F N ZAMAN,MS. B. HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST, SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 29.04 .2025 Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel for the Forest Department. The petitioner was engaged as a Casual Worker in the Department of Environment and Forest at Kalain Forest Range under Karimganj Division, Karimganj since March, 1993. During the process undertaken by the respondent authorities for consideration of the cases of casual workers for granting of minimum scale of pay in terms of the order dated 08.06.2017 passed in Writ Appeal No. 45 of 2014, the names of several casual workers working under various Forest Divisions were submitted by the concerned DFOs. However, the name of the petitioner along with some other casual workers were inadvertently left out. Subsequently, the concerned DFO furnished a list of seven casual workers including the writ petitioner for due consideration for grant of the benefits in terms of the judgment and order dated 08.06.2017 passed in Writ Appeal No.45 of 2014 in Upen Das (Supra). However, no consequential orders were passed. There was no information given to the petitioner with regard to his claims for grant of minimum scale of pay. Being thus situated, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 1342 of 2023. On the day when the matter was called up, taking into consideration the submissions made by the Page No.# 3/7 learned counsel for the Forest Department that if the petitioner files a fresh representation his case will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed thereon, the writ petition was disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the authority and file a fresh representation for inclusion of his name and for grant of minimum scale of pay as have been done in the cases of other similarly situated persons. It was further directed that once a representation is filed the same shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking order within 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that order. Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court the petitioner filed his representation dated 01.02.2024. The authorities upon due consideration of the representation, disposed of the representation filed by the petitioner by a speaking order dated 02.04.2024. By the said order, the claim of the petitioner was rejected. One of the ground as reflected in Para 7 of the impugned order is that the name of the petitioner did not figure in the list received from the Divisional Forest Officer Karimganj Division, Karimganj and therefore his name did not figure in the list submitted by the PCCF and HoFF, Assam vide Ref. No. FE.20/1/Pt-VIII/CW/Fixed Pay/2017 dated 07th June, 2019. Further in Para 11 of the said impugned order it is mentioned that as per communication dated 22nd June, 2023 submitted by the Divisional Forest Officer, Karimganj Forest Division, Karimganj the petitioner did not attend any work under Kalain Forest Range under Karimganj Forest Division, Karimganj since 10th of February, 2014. Under such circumstances, the claims of the petitioner was rejected. Being aggrieved this writ petition has been filed. Pursuant to issuance of notice the respondent No.3 has filed an affidavit, Page No.# 4/7 wherein it is stated that as per the communications received from the DFO Kalain Forest Range, the petitioner did not attend any work since 10.02.2014 and accordingly his case could not be considered for grant of minimum scale of pay. The learned Standing Counsel representing the Forest Department also reiterates that in the communication forwarded by the DFO, Kalain Forest Range under Karimganj Forest Division, Karimganj the petitioner was not found to be in service since 10.02.2014 and accordingly, his case was not considered. The learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the petitioner's name was duly forwarded by the DFO, Karimganj Forest Division, Karimganj along with seven other persons and therefore the contention of the respondents that the petitioner was not in service w.e.f. 10.02.2014 is incorrect and not tenable. The learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the pleadings available on record have been perused. It is seen that by communication dated 08.09.2014 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Karimganj Division, Karimganj to the Chief Conservator of Forest, Southern Assam Circle, Silchar-1, Cachar, names of seven casual workers along with their supporting documents which were forwarded by the Office of the DFO, Karimganj. It is stated therein that these names were earlier forwarded along with other casual workers but their names did not appear in the list of 187 numbers of casual workers received from the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Head of Forest Force vide communication No. FES.1/Casual Worker/Pt-I dated 21.06.2014, the name of Page No.# 5/7 the petitioner was found at Serial No.3 in the statement enclosed to the communication dated 08.09.2014 issued by the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj. The petitioner was shown to be in engagement of the department since March, 1993. The statement was also endorsed by the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj dated 08.09.2014. Further, in the communication issued by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Southern Assam Circle, Silchar dated 30.01.2020 to the PCCF and HoFF, it was clearly mentioned that the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj had submitted the bank accounts of 187 numbers of left out casual workers as per the list forwarded by Addl. PCCF(T), LAZ along with another statement showing the particulars of seven numbers of casual workers including the name of the petitioner along with their supporting documents whose names were earlier forwarded earlier but did not appear in the list of 187 numbers of left out casual workers received from Addl. PCCF(T), LAZ vide DFO, Karimganj Division’s letter No. KJ(T)/Esstt/Casual Worker(187)/6566, dated 08.09.2014. In the said communication it was clearly mentioned that pursuant to the communication issued by the DFO enclosing the name of the seven casual workers including the name of the writ petitioner, no further communication was received. It is further mentioned in the said communication that pursuant to the list of left out casual workers under Karimganj Division, Karimganj was submitted to the PCCF & HoFF, by the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj which included the name of the present petitioner, no communication was received in respect of the inclusion of the name of the petitioner as left out casual workers. Under such circumstances it is evident that the DFO Karimganj Division, Page No.# 6/7 Karimganj had submitted a list of casual workers who were found to be left out from the original list submitted and the said subsequent list of seven casual workers also contain the name of the present petitioner along with all particulars. The further communication from the Office of the Chief Conservator of Forests clearly makes a reference to the said communication issued by the DFO. Under such circumstances the finding of the PCCF that the name of the petitioner was not found in the list forwarded by the concerned DFO does not appear to be correct on facts. The further statement at serial No.11 of the said impugned order dated 02.04.2024 that the petitioner was not found to be in service or attend the work under the Kalain Range, Karimganj Division since 10.02.2014 is also not found to be correct on facts. The affidavit filed by the respondents, where there is no denial that the communications dated 08.09.2014 issued by the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj and the communication dated 30.01.2020 issued by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Southern Assam Circle, Silchar were not issued. Under such circumstances it is clear that the impugned order was passed without taking into consideration the aforementioned communications. In fact the impugned order has no reference to the aforementioned communications. The Court’s view mandates that the Department will revisit and pass afresh order in respect of the claims made by the petitioner on the representation filed, pursuant to the order dated 24.01.2024 passed in WP(C) No.1342/2023. The impugned order dated 02.04.2024 is therefore, set aside and the matter is remanded back to the PCCF to pass a speaking order afresh. While passing the speaking order, the PCCF will examine the entire records and thereupon pass appropriate orders. The speaking order should also reflect the positions available from the departmental records as to why the names of the seven casual workers including the Page No.# 7/7 petitioner which was submitted by communication dated 08.09.2014 by the DFO, Karimganj Division, Karimganj was not considered and/or if considered, what consequential orders thereon were passed relying the benefits of minimum scale of pay to the petitioner and other similarly situated persons mentioned in the list. Therefore, in view of the directions issued by the Court today, the matter is remanded back to the authorities and the authorities shall revisit the issue and pass appropriate orders within 30 days of the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant