Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19836 (GAU)

LUKA PEGU AND 16 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.

WP(C)/5695/2025 · 2025-09-23

Nelson Sailo

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010218612025 2025:GAU-AS:13143 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5695/2025 LUKA PEGU AND 16 ORS SON OF- AJIT PEGU, RESIDENT OF- VILL - KARPUNPULI, DIST- DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN- 787057, LIB. ASSTT, JIADHAL COLLEGE 2: DIP KUMAR DOLEY SON OF -PADMADHAR DOLEY RESIDENT OF- VILL -NALAMUKH DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 ASSTT LIB. JIADHAL COLLEGE 3: LAKHYA NATH DOLEY SON OF - MAHENDRA DOLEY RESIDENT OF- VILL- NALAMUKH DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 SR. ASSTT JIADHAL COLLEGE 4: TULAN PAIT SON OF - JUGEN PAIT RESIDENT OF- VILL -KULAPATHAR DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 SR. ASSTT JIADHAL COLLEGE 5: DIPIKA DOLEY DAUGHTER OF -HEMA DOLEY RESIDENT OF- VILL -KARPUMPULI Page No.# 2/6 DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 JR. ASSTT JIADHAL COLLEGE 6: PALLABI PEGU DAUGHTER OF -HIREN PEGU RESIDENT OF- VILL -NALAMUKH DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 JR. ASSTT JIADHAL COLLEGE 7: BIPUL BORAH SON OF -GUBINDRA BORAH RESIDENT OF- VILL -NA-ALI BHAJU DIST-DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 GRADE-IV JIADHAL COLLEGE 8: KHAGEN DOLEY SON OF -DINESH DOLEY RESIDENT OF- VILL --DIHIRI DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-787057 GRADE-IV JIADHAL COLLEGE 9: NILESWAR PEGU SON OF - LAKAI PEGU RESIDENT OF- VILL--NALAMUKH DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 GRADE-IV JIADHAL COLLEGE 10: RAJA PEGU SON OF -BETSHARAM PEGU RESIDENT OF- VILL --NALAMUKH DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 GRADE-IV Page No.# 3/6 JIADHAL COLLEGE 11: JHORNA PEGU DAUGHTER OF -CHANDRA PEGU RESIDENT OF- VILL --TINIGHARIA DIST-- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 GRADE-IV JIADHAL COLLEGE 12: KHIRESWAR DOLEY SON OF -GOLAPCHAN DOLEY RESIDENT OF- VILL --NALAMUKH DIST--DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 GRADE-IV JIADHAL COLLEGE 13: DIPAK HAJONG SON OF - DIPTI KUMAR HAJONG RESIDENT OF- VILL- UDALGURI NEPALI GAON DIST- UDALGURI ASSAM PIN- 784114 JR. ASSTT KALAGURU BISHNU RABHA DEGREE COLLEGE 14: PRAN KANTA MONDAL SON OF - LATE KANAI CH ROY MONDAL RESIDENT OF- VILL- DHARMASALA PT- V DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783324 SR. ASSTT DHARMASALA COLLEGE 15: JAMIR UDDIN SK SON OF - UMAR UDDIN SK RESIDENT OF- VILL- DHARMASALA PT- V DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783324 GRADE- IV DHARMASALA COLLEGE 16: MUSTAFA AHMED SON OF - ASGAR ALI SK RESIDENT OF- VILL- DHARMASALA PT- III Page No.# 4/6 DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783324 JR. ASSTT DHARMASALA COLLEGE 17: MATIOR RAHMAN SON OF - LATE ASKAR ALI RESIDENT OF- VILL- DHARMASALA PT- IV DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783324 GRADE- IV DHARMASALA COLLEG VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781006. 2:THE SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781006. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-78101 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DUTTA, MS N CHATTERJEE Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HIGHER EDU, SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 24-09-2025 Heard Mr. M Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department Page No.# 5/6 appearing for respondent Nos. 1 & 3 as well as Ms. RM Barooah, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department appearing for respondent No. 2. [2.] Having regard to the nature of the grievance projected by the petitioners, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself, as agreed to by the learned counsels for the parties. [3.] The case of the petitioners is that they are working as Senior Assistants, Junior Assistants, Library Assistants/Assistant Librarian and Grade-IV employees under different provincialised Colleges and they come under the administrative control of the Director of Higher Education, Assam (respondent No. 3). The grievance expressed is that although their services have been provincialised, they are only given fixed pay, whereas they should be given scale pay in terms of the decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Mohar Ali Sheikh & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in 2024 5 GLT 689, which was again relied upon by another Division Bench in WP(C) 3239/2023, which was disposed of on 05.08.2025 (Abdul Motaleb & 147 Ors. Vs. State of Assam & 6 Ors.). [4.] The learned counsel submits that the petitioners in Mohar Ali Sheikh (supra) were Tutors, whereas in Abdul Motaleb (supra), the petitioners were non-teaching staffs. The present petitioners are Senior Assistants, Junior Assistants, Library Assistants/Assistant Librarian and Grade-IV employees and should be covered by the orders passed by the Division Bench in the earlier 2 (two) cases. But, since they had not approached this Court, the petitioners have been informed that their cases will not be considered. [5.] The learned counsel submits that similarly situated persons had approached this Court by filing WP(C) 5232/2025 (Krishna Baishya & Ors. Vs. Page No.# 6/6 State of Assam & Ors.), which was disposed of on 08.09.2025 by directing the petitioners to submit their respective representations before the Director of Elementary Education with a further direction that if the case of the petitioners are covered by the earlier judgments of this Court passed by the Division Bench, similar benefits should be extended to them. The learned counsel submits that a similar order in the instant case may be passed. [6.] Considering the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file their respective representations before the Director of Higher Education within a period of 10 (ten) days with a claim for payment of scale of pay in terms of the earlier judgments rendered by the Division Bench. The Director of Higher Education, upon receipt of such representations, shall consider the same and if it is found that the petitioners are indeed covered by the said judgments, similar benefits should be extended to them. JUDGE Comparing Assistant