Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010054712024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1513/2024 MONOJ DEWANJI S/O- LATE SATYA RANJAN DEWANJI, R/O- SUNANDA ENCLAVE, FLAT NO. 53A, CLUB ROAD, NEAR HARIMA MANDIR, SILCHAR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR- 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PARIBAHAN BHAWAN JOWAHAR NAGAR KHANAPARA GUWAHATI- 781022 3:THE DIRECTOR INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT ULUBARI GUWAHATI PIN- 781007 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION SILCHAR- 788003 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR Page No.# 2/7 GUWAHATI- 78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B D DAS, MR H K SARMA,MR. D THAOSEN,MR J LOTHA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IWT, SC, FINANCE Linked Case : WP(C)/1184/2024 ROOPA DEWANJI W/O- MANOJ DEWANJI R/O- SUNANDA ENCLAVE FLAT NO. 53A CLUB ROAD NEAR HARIMA MANDIR SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT DISPUR- 781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PARIBAHAN BHAWAN JOWAHAR NAGAR KHANAPARA GUWAHATI- 781022. 3:THE DIRECTOR INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT Page No.# 3/7 ULUBARI GUWAHATI PIN- 781007. 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION SILCHAR- 788003. 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWHATI ASSAM-781006. ------------ Advocate for : MR B D DAS Advocate for : SC IWT appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 28.05.2025 Heard Mr. B D Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. J Lotha, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. M D Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 and Mr. A Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department appearing for respondent No. 5. Having regard to the nature of grievance projected by the petitioners, the writ petition is taken up for disposal with the consent of the parties. Page No.# 4/7 [2.] This is the second time the petitioners are before this Court. The earlier writ petition being WP(C) No. 550/2023 & 1389/2023 was disposed of by this Court with an observation that the case of the petitioners be considered for promotion to the rank of Sub-Section Assistant in accordance with law. Be it stated herein that the petitioners have been initially appointed as Work-Charged Khalashi and were, later on, regularized in service in the year 2004. The regularization of the two petitioners is in a personal post. However, after the disposal of their earlier writ petitions, their claim for promotion was rejected on the ground that they were holding personal post, which was an ex-cadre post and therefore, they were not eligible to be promoted to higher post. Reliance to the case of Dilip Talukdar & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in (2017) 3 GHL 376 was made by the respondent authorities. [3.] Mr. B D Das, learned Senior Counsel submits that similarly situated persons under the establishment of Director, Inland Water Transport had been given the benefit of promotion although working in personal post. Likewise, even in the Public Health Engineering Department, a number of similarly situated persons working in personal post have also been promoted in the year 2002 after obtaining the concurrence from Finance Department. He submits that the petitioners have also submitted their representation on 09.02.2024 for Page No.# 5/7 encaderment of their service to a Grade-IV cadre post but the same has not been considered till date. As such, the petitioners are again before this Court. [4.] The learned Senior Counsel further submits that similarly situated persons, being aggrieved with the rejection of their candidature and promotion to the next higher post on the ground of holding ex-cadre post, had approached the Division Bench of this Court through W.A No. 5/2024 (Nibon Chandra Das & 27 Ors. Vs. State of Assam & 8 Ors.). The writ appeal was disposed of vide Order dated 14.05.2025 with an observation that the dismissal of the writ petition filed by the writ appellants would not be a bar for considering their application/representation for encadrement of the post which they are holding so as to get the benefit of promotion. [5.] The learned Senior Counsel submits that in Dilip Talukdar & Ors. (supra) what was being considered was promotion to the higher post by an employee holding ex-cadre post. However, in the present case, the petitioners are seeking their encadrement to the cadre post so as to get the benefit of further promotion to the post of Section Assistant under the Transport Department. He, therefore, submits that the respondents may be directed to consider the petitioners for encadrement so that they can be promoted to the next higher post. Page No.# 6/7 [6.] It is seen that although the petitioners had submitted their representation for encadrement of their service as a Grade-IV cadre post, but the same has not been considered. The rejection of the prayer of the petitioners as can be seen from the meeting minutes of the DPC dated 19.11.2024 annexed as Annexure-I to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent No. 3 goes to show that such rejection was on the basis of the decision made in Dilip Talukdar & Ors. (supra). The issue in that case was regarding rejection of the claim for promotion on ground of not being in a cadre post unlike the present claim that they should be encadred to a cadre post. [7.] The above being the position and keeping in mind what has been observed in Nibon Chandra Das & 27 Ors. (supra), the petitioner are given liberty to file their representation for encadrement before the Director, Inland Water Transport (respondent No. 3), so as to enable them seek promotion to the next higher post. In the event, such representation is filed within 15 days from today, the respondent No. 3 shall consider the same in the right earnest and take a decision in the matter by taking into account all aspects of the matter as raised by the petitioner. The exercise shall be completed within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the representation. In order to dispose of the representations submitted by the petitioners as directed herein Page No.# 7/7 above, the respondent No. 3 may take up the matter with any other authorities that may be necessary. [8.] With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant