Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010131952025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3384/2025 PULAKESH CHAKRABARTY S/O- LATE JAGADISH CHAKRABARTY, R/O- H.NO- 7, NAMGHAR PATH, MILANPUR TINIALI, CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI-21, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GUWAHATI, DISPUR, ASSAM, PIN- 781006. 2:THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM LABOUR WELFARE DEPTT. GUWAHATI DISPUR ASSAM PIN- 781006. 3:THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER ASSAM GOPINATH NAGAR GUWAHATI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P TALUKDAR, MR W R MEDHI,MR A V SINGH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 26-06-2025 Heard Mr. W.R. Medhi, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Perused the averments made in the writ petition. The writ petitioner herein is presently serving as Sr. Assistant in the office of the Labour Commissioner, Assam. According to the writ petitioner, he is eligible for being considered for promotion to the next higher post of Labour Inspector. However, merely on account of the fact that he has crossed the upper age limit of 45 years as prescribed by the amended rules, the respondents are neither considering him for promotion nor is there any move to grant age relaxation to the petitioner. Mr. Medhi submits that in view of the provision of Rule 20 of the Assam Labour Service Rules, 1970, which contains a provision for relaxation of the provision of rules in case of deserving candidates, the petitioner has submitted a representation before the Labour Commissioner, Assam on 19-06-2025 seeking age relaxation. It is the submission of Mr. Medhi that the respondents have sympathetically considered the cases of other similarly situated candidates in the past and this Court has also passed several orders in the writ petitions instituted by similarly situated candidates, wherein directions were issued to the authorities to consider the prayer for age relaxation made by those candidates. In support of the above argument, Mr. Medhi has invited the attention of this Court to the order dated 10-01-2025 passed by a coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No. 128/2025. Page No.# 3/4 Responding to the above, Mr. R. Dhar, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam has produced a copy of the communication dated 23-01-2025 issued by the Labour Commissioner recommending the case of the similarly situated candidates for relaxation of age by citing adequate reasons, so as to submit that similar approach can be adopted even in case of the writ petitioner. It also appears that the Labour Commissioner has already forwarded the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Addl. Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Labour Welfare Department, Dispur vide communication dated 19-06-2025 and the matter is presently pending consideration before the concerned authority. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the Govt. should be given a reasonable opportunity to take a decision on the request made by the petitioner for relaxation of upper age, in terms of the projection made by the Labour Commissioner, Assam by referring to the relevant provision of the rules. The learned counsel for both the sides have also agreed to such a recourse. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of by providing that the respondent No. 1 may take a decision on the application submitted by the petitioner by bearing in mind the past practices of the department adopted in cases of similarly situated candidates as well as the mandate of Rule 20 of the Rules of 1970, so as to address hardship, if any, faced by such candidate due to operation of the rules. Till such time the representation dated 19-06-2025 submitted by the petitioner is disposed of by a reasoned order, no final order of promotion to the rank of Labour Page No.# 4/4 Inspector based on the basis of the ongoing DPC, shall be issued. The written instruction produced by Mr. Dhar be retained in the record of this case. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant