Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010149252025 2025:GAU-AS:9673-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/233/2025 SAJID ANSARI S/O LATE JAYNAL ABEDIN ANSARI, R/O VILL .MEDHI CHUBURI, P.O. RANGAPARA, P.S. DHEKIAJULI, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM 784505 VERSUS 1.STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM 781006 2:COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM 781006 2:COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM 3:DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI ASSAM 3:DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI ASSAM 781001 4:CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER BARBARUAH ICDS PROJECT DIBRUGARH ASSAM 786007 4:CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER BARBARUAH ICDS PROJECT DIBRUGARH ASSAM For the Appellant(s) : Mr. K. Sarma, Advocate. : Mr. S. Boruah, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Baruah, Government Advocate, Assam. Page No.# 2/3 – BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 28.07.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. K. Sarma, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. S. Baruah, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the State. In this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 11.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.949/2021. The appellant herein has sought back-wages under the circumstances that he was appointed on the post of LDA-cum-Typist in the year 2001 but his service was terminated at the instance of another person, who claimed to be higher than him in the merit list. This termination order was passed behind the back of the appellant. The appellant challenged such termination order pursuant to which his service was secured. All this happened by around 2013. It was only in 2021 that the appellant came before this Court seeking back-wages for the period that he had remained outside the service on account of his termination. The learned Single Judge rejected such claim on the ground that the appellant had only been appointed and not reinstated. After a long legal battle, the appellant could get his appointment. Page No.# 3/3 Under such circumstances, there could be no justification for payment of back-wages, which are not automatic. It would be dependent on various factors, none of which was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge including whether he was gainfully employed during that period. That apart, finding that the appellant had approached the Court after 7(seven) years of his appointment and that during the period he remained out of service on account of termination of his service, which also was because of the claim of the other person, higher in the merit list in the selection process, there being no averment/evidence of his non-employment elsewhere, we find the decision of the learned Single Judge rejecting the prayer for grant of back- wages to the appellant to be absolutely justified, requiring no interference. The writ appeal is dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant