Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010103022020 2025:GAU-AS:4736 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3047/2020 RITURAJ HAZARIKA S/O LT. HEM CHANDRA HAZARIKA A PERMANENT R/O NAKARI, WARD NO. 2, NORTH LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 10/551, DCB ROAD, JORHAT, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY DEPTT. COMMERCE, UDYOG BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110011 2:THE TEA BOARD REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN 14 B.T.M. SARANI KOLKATA-70001 3:THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN TEA BOARD 14-B.T.M. SARANI KOLKATA-700001 4:THE SECRETARY TEA BOARD 14-B.T.M. SARANI KOLKATA-700001 5:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TEA BOARD HOUSEFED COMPLEX 5TH FLOOR CENTRAL BLOCK BELTOLA BASISTHA ROAD Page No.# 2/4 DISPUR GUWAHATI-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G N SAHEWALLA, MS. S. TODI,MR. M SAHEWALLA,MR. A CHETIA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 21.04.2025 Heard Mr. H.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tea Board. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to accept the resignation duly submitted by the petitioner before the respondent authorities. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent Tea Board has agreed to accept the resignation of the petitioner from the service with the condition that the petitioner shall withdraw the Court’s case i.e WP(C) No.6316/2013 pending before this Court and pay the amount due to the respondent Tea Board i.e. differential amount to existing pay scale and lower pay scale from where he was promoted. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent Tea Board has also agreed that in case the final verdict in the pending writ petition goes in favour of the petitioner, the Page No.# 3/4 differential amount of the existing pay scale and lower pay scale shall be returned by the respondent Tea Board. He accordingly submits that final verdict having now been given in favour of the petitioner the differential amount in question be directed to be reimbursed by the respondent Tea Board. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tea Board does not object to the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and have perused the material available on record. It appears that this Court on 16.09.2020 directed the petitioner to deposit the bond of differential amount which remain due after payment of Rs. 5,00,000/- before the respondent Tea Board. The operating portion of the order dated 16.09.2020 is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:- “Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has pressing urgency in the matter because the petitioner would lose the job offer which he got, if there is any further delay for acceptance of his resignation. It is submitted that without prejudice to his rights and reliefs as claimed in this writ petition, he has been instructed that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- before the Tea Board and he also ready and willing to submit a bond for the differential amount as directed vide the Impugned letter dated 10.07.2020. It is submitted that on receipt of the same, the respondent Tea Board may be directed to accept the resignation of the petitioner. Having heard both sides on the offer made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that as the petitioner has got a job offer elsewhere and there is every likelihood that if there is any delay in acceptance of said job offer, the petitioner may lose his offer. Therefore, pending further orders/ Page No.# 4/4 decision in this writ petition, it is provided that on deposit of a sum of Rs.5.00 lakh by the petitioner before the Tea Board, at their Guwahati Office by way of bank draft or way of RTGS transfer and upon submission of a bond of the differential amount as claimed vide communication bearing reference No. Estt/PR/H-32-dated 10.07.2020 by the Secretary-in-charge of the Tea Board, the competent authority of the Tea Board shall accept the resignation tendered by the petitioner and shall communicate the acceptance of the resignation to the petitioner within a period of one week therefrom by an e-mail followed by hardcopy thereof. It is made clear that such deposit of money and the bond by the petitioner would be subject to further orders of this Court. In order to facilitate the petitioner to deposit the bond of deferential amount, which remain due after payment of Rs.5.00 lakh as indicated above, the authorities of the Tea Board would e-mail the actual/ approximate amount of differential money to the petitioner within 3(three) working days, at his e-mail address.” It appears that the petitioner thereafter deposited the differential amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- along with a bond before the respondent Tea Board. It appears that since the verdict has now gone in favour of the petitioner, this Court deems appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by directing the respondent Tea Board to refund the said Rs. 5,00,000/- to the petitioner within a period of 2 (two) months from today and also to release the bond submitted by the petitioner. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant