Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13351 (GAU)

DALIM DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS

WP(C)/5818/2021 · 2026-08-24

N Unni Krishnan Nair

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/18 GAHC010281292023 2026:GAU-AS:12247 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7350/2023 DALIM DAS S/O LATE SURENDRA NATH DAS R/O NARAYANPUR BYE LANE 2 H/NO. 16 GANESHGURI GUWAHATI-781006 DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM 2:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE Page No.# 2/18 ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 4:THE ADDL. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (T) LOWER ASSAM ZONE BASISTHA GUWAHATI-781029 5:THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM GUWAHATI-781029 ------------ Advocate for : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV. Advocate for : SC FOREST appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/5818/2021 DALIM DAS S/O LT. SURENDRA NATH DAS R/O NAYANPUR BYELANE 2 HOUSE NO. 16 GANESHGURI GUWAHATI-781006 DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE ADDL. SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 Page No.# 3/18 4:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF THE FOREST FORCE ASSAM ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 5:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (W/L) ASSAM ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 6:THE ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (ADMN. AND VIG.) ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI-781037 7:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (T) CENTRAL ASSAM CIRCLE BASISTHA GUWAHATI-781029 8:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER KAMRUP EAST DIVISION BASISTHA GUWAHATI-781029 ------------ Advocate for : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV. Advocate for : SC FOREST appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 25.08.2026 Heard Mr. B. D. Konwar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. H. Agarwal, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I. Page No.# 4/18 Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General (A&E), Assam. 2. The petitioner in the above noted 02 (two) writ petitions and the respondents, therein, are one and the same. The issue involved in the above noted writ petitions having emanated from the same facts and also involving similar questions of law, with the consent of the parties, the above noted cases were taken up for analogous hearing and are being disposed of by the present order. 3. The petitioner, Dalim Das, in the above noted writ petitions, was initially appointed as Soil Conservation Ranger under the Soil Conservation Department, in the year 1988. Thereafter, on completion of his Forest Ranger’s Course training, the services of the petitioner was regularized in the said capacity vide order dated 01.02.1991. The petitioner, thereafter, on an approval being granted by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC), came be absorbed as a Forest Ranger, from the post of Soil Conservation Ranger, vide an order dated 01.04.1997. As the petitioner was continuing in his services, he was issued with a show-cause notice dated 11.06.2020.The Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner on conclusion of the said proceeding, had vide an order dated 16.09.2021, proceeded to exonerate the petitioner from the charges so framed against him, therein. The petitioner being so exonerated from the charges framed against him and in the meanwhile, the Page No.# 5/18 respondent authorities, having considered the cases of the Forest Ranger’s for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest and persons junior to the petitioner also being so promoted, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.5818/2021, praying for grant of retrospective promotion in his case. During the pendency of the said proceedings, the Respondent Authorities had instituted a fresh proceeding against the petitioner by way of issuance of a show-cause notice dated 21.06.2021. The proceedings in the said show-cause notice dated 21.06.2021, was continued with and on conclusion of the proceedings, therein, the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner vide an order dated 09.03.2023, proceeded to exonerate the petitioner from the charges so framed against him, therein. The petitioner now being exonerated from the charges framed against him in the above noted 02 (two) Disciplinary proceedings instituted against him, the petitioner was promoted in terms of the selection made in his case to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest vide an order dated 30.03.2023. The promotion so effected in respect of the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, was, however, so effected with prospective effect. The petitioner at this relevant point of time, was issued with a communication, wherein, it was stated that the date of superannuation of the petitioner would fall on 31.03.2023. The petitioner being aggrieved with Page No.# 6/18 the decision arrived at by the authorities to retire him from his services w.e.f. 31.03.2023, approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.3642/2023. This Court vide order dated 28.07.2023, upon appreciating the contention of the petitioner, that he accepts 31.03.2023, as the date of his superannuation, and the said position not being objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents, proceeded to dispose of the writ petition by directing that the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner be expeditiously processed and released to him. After the said order dated 28.07.2023, was passed by this Court, it is projected that the Respondent Authorities, had undertaken an exercise to determine the date of superannuation of the petitioner and, in this connection, proceeded to issue an order dated 05.12.2023, determining, therein, that the actual date of birth of the petitioner as per his HSLC admit card fell on “01.04.1962”, and accordingly, the petitioner was slated to superannuate from his services w.e.f. “31.03.2022”. The petitioner having continued in his services till 31.03.2023, the salaries received by the petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023, was directed to be recovered. Further, the promotion effected in respect of the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, vide the order dated 30.03.2023, was held to be invalid and inadmissible and accordingly, the petitioner was demoted Page No.# 7/18 to the rank of Forest Ranger Officer. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order dated 05.12.2023, had approached this Court by way of instituting WP(C).No.7350/2023. 4. Mr. B. D. Konwar, learned Senior Counsel, by reiterating the facts, noticed, hereinabove, has submitted that the petitioner having actually continued in his services till 31.03.2023, and such continuation in service by the petitioner, not being demonstrated to be on account of any misrepresentation made by him, it was not permissible for the respondent authorities, to punish the petitioner by also making recovery of the salaries drawn by the petitioner after 01.04.2022 till 31.03.2023. Mr. Konwar, submits that the Departmental proceedings instituted against the petitioner had culminated in his exoneration from the charges framed against him and the last of such Department proceeding so instituted against the petitioner was closed with the exoneration of the petitioner from the charges framed against him, therein, vide order dated 09.03.2023. Mr. Konwar, submits that juniors of the petitioner were considered, when the petitioner was under a cloud and on such consideration, vide the order dated 26.02.2021, persons junior to the petitioner in the cadre of Forest Ranger also came to be promoted to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest. Accordingly, Mr. Konwar, submits that the promotion of the petitioner in pursuance to his exoneration from the charges framed against has now to relate back to the Page No.# 8/18 date when his junior(s) were so promoted. 4.1. Mr. B. D. Konwar, has further submitted that the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner would now be mandated to be so processed and finalized by considering the petitioner, on the date of his superannuation, to be working as a Assistant Conservator of Forest. 5. Mr. I. Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department, by placing on record, the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee for considering the cases of Forest Rangers to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest held on 16.02.2021, has submitted that the case of the petitioner was duly considered by the said Departmental promotion Committee and the recommendation of the said Committee, in respect of the petitioner, was kept in a sealed cover. Mr. Borthakur, by referring to the determination as made in respect of the date of retirement of the petitioner has submitted that on account of a manipulation made in the service book of the petitioner, the date of birth of the petitioner, therein, was recorded as 01.04.1965, and accordingly, it was projected by the petitioner that his date of superannuation would fall on 31.03.2025. Mr. Borthakur, submits that for ascertaining the said aspect of the matter, the respondent authorities had carried out an enquiry into the same and basing on the HSLC admit card of the petitioner, it was determined that the date of birth of the petitioner fell on “01.04.1962”, and not “01.04.1965”, and accordingly, the date of Page No.# 9/18 superannuation of the petitioner was determined as “31.03.2022”. He submits that the said determination of the date of birth as well as the date of superannuation of the petitioner, being permissible to be made by the respondent authorities and such determination being based on historical documents, the same cannot be disputed and the petitioner cannot be permitted to continue in his services beyond the date of his actual superannuation. Mr. Borthakur, has further submitted that the promotion of the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, effected vide order dated 30.03.2023, was so done basing on the recommendation made in favour of the petitioner by the Departmental Promotion Committee, in its meeting held on 16.02.2021. He however, submits that as on 30.03.2023, it being determined that the petitioner was not continuing in his services, the said order of promotion in respect of the petitioner was held to be invalid and accordingly cancelled along with the reversion of the petitioner to the cadre of Forest Ranger. 6. Mr. I. Borthakur, submits that in view of the said developments, the petitioner would have to be considered on the date of his superannuation i.e., 31.03.2022, to be holding a post in the cadre of Forest Ranger, and accordingly, he would be entitled to have his pension and pensionary benefits released to him by reckoning the pay drawn by him as a Forest Ranger as on 31.03.2022 Page No.# 10/18 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. 8. The facts noticed, hereinabove, leading to the institution of the above noted writ petitions is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the grievance of the petitioner as can be culled out is that, he was denied his due promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest w.e.f. the date his junior was so promoted to the said post more particularly w.e.f. 26.02.2021, with all consequential benefits. The petitioner has also assailed an order dated 05-12-2023, by which the respondents have determined the correct date of birth of the petitioner, as well as the date of his superannuation and it is projected that such determination made by the respondents was in violation of the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 28-07-2023, in WP(C)No.3642/2023. 9. The petitioner was issued with a show-cause notice dated 11-06- 2020, instituting a Departmental proceeding against him. However, the petitioner, on conclusion of the said Departmental proceedings, came to be exonerated from the charges framed against him, therein. The case of the petitioner was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee, for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, in its meeting held on 16-02-2021. However, in view of the fact that there was a Page No.# 11/18 Departmental proceeding instituted against the petitioner, the recommendation made by the Departmental Promotion Committee, in respect of the petitioner came to be kept in a sealed cover. The petitioner on being exonerated from the charges framed against him in the Departmental proceeding so instituted, had approached this Court by way of instituting WP(C).No.5818/2021, praying for his promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, with retrospective effect i.e., w.e.f., the date his juniors were so promoted. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the Respondent Authorities had issued a fresh show-cause notice to the petitioner on 21-06-2021. The petitioner having continued to remain under cloud, his case for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, was not considered. The Disciplinary authority of the petitioner vide an order dated 09-03-2023, on conclusion of the Departmental proceedings instituted against the petitioner, vide the show-cause notice dated 21-06- 2021, proceeded to exonerate the petitioner from the charges so framed against him. On being exonerated from the charges framed against him even in the second Departmental proceedings so instituted, the petitioner was promoted to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, vide an order dated 30-03-2023. The Respondent Authorities thereafter, construing the date of retirement of the petitioner to be falling on 31-03-2023, had issued to him a notice in the matter. The petitioner being aggrieved by the decision Page No.# 12/18 now arrived at by the Respondent Authorities to retire him from his services w.e.f., 31-03-2023, had approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C).No.3642/2023. The petitioner in the said writ petition had projected that his correct date of birth being “01-04-1965”, he would retire from his services on reaching the age of superannuation w.e.f., “31- 03-2025” only. This Court vide order dated 28-07-2023, noticing the submission made by the petitioner that he would accept the date of his retirement as 31-03-2023, proceeded to dispose of the said writ petition, requiring the respondent authorities to process the pension and pensionary benefits receivable by the petitioner, expeditiously. 10. However, what is required to be noticed is that vide the said order dated 28.07.2023, this Court had observed that the writ petition was being disposed of without expressing any opinion on the core controversy regarding the correct date of birth of the petitioner. The respondent authorities, thereafter, proceeded to carry out an exercise for determining the actual date of birth of the petitioner and his consequential date of superannuation. On such enquiry made, the Government in the Environment and Forest Department, vide an order dated 05-12-2023, proceeded to determine that the date of birth of the petitioner was “01-04- 1962” as per his HSLC admit card and accordingly, the petitioner was held to have reached his age of superannuation as on “31-03-2002”. The said Page No.# 13/18 determination being made, in the said order, it was further directed that the pay and allowances drawn by the petitioner w.e.f., 01-04-2022 to 31-03- 2023, shall be recovered. Further, the promotion granted to the petitioner to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, vide order dated 30-03-2023, now being found to have been so granted after the date of superannuation of the petitioner, the said order was held to be invalid and the petitioner was demoted to the rank of Forest Range Officer. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had instituted WP(C).No.7350/2023, assailing the said order dated 05-12-2023. 11. This Court, although vide order dated 28-07-2023, in WP(C)No.3642/2023, had proceeded to dispose of the said writ petition on the basis of the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that he would accept his date of retirement as “31.03.2023”, this Court finds from the order dated 28-07-2023, that such acceptance of the contention of the petitioner, was without expressing any opinion on the core-controversy regarding the correct date of birth of the petitioner. Accordingly, it is held that there was no bar imposed upon the respondent authorities by this Court, from determining the actual date of birth of the petitioner. The order dated 05.12.2023, to the extent of the determination made, therein, of the actual date of birth of the petitioner and his consequential date of superannuation, in the opinion of this Court is not erroneous and was Page No.# 14/18 permissible to be so done. 12. The Respondent Authorities thereafter, having determined the date of birth of the petitioner as “01-04-1962”, basing on his HSLC admit and such determination made in respect of the petitioner not having been disputed by him, in the above noted proceedings, such determination being so made on cogent grounds, this Court is of the considered view that the date of birth of the petitioner as determined as “01-04-1962”, would not mandate an interference. Accordingly, the petitioner is held to have superannuated from his services w.e.f., 31-03-2022.The petitioner having superannuated from his services on 31-03-2022, the direction contained in the order dated 05.12.2023 to the extent that the promotion effected in his case to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, w.e.f., 30-03-2023, was not permissible and the reversion of the petitioner to the rank of Forest Range Officer, as ordered in the considered view of this Court is also not erroneous. However, the directions contained in the order dated 05.12.2023, towards effecting recovery from the petitioner of the pay and allowances drawn by the petitioner for the period 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023 and the manner in which his promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest is to be granted, shall be dealt with later in this order. 13. Having drawn the said conclusions, this Court finds that the case of the petitioner was considered for promotion to the rank of Assistant Page No.# 15/18 Conservator of Forest by the Departmental Selection Committee in its meeting held on 16-02-2021, and the recommendation made in favour of the petitioner was kept in a sealed cover. 14. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the promotion effected in respect of the petitioner vide the order dated 30-03- 2023, was so effected after opening the sealed cover, wherein, the decision of the Departmental Selection Committee arrived at in its meeting held on 16-02-2021, was so kept. Accordingly, this Court would hold that the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee, in its meeting held on 16-02-2021, had recommended the case of the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest. 15. It is a settled position of law that when an employee is under a cloud in view of a pending Departmental proceeding and/or a judicial proceeding, the case of such employee is required to be considered for promotion. However, the recommendation of the Selection Committee is to be kept in sealed cover. In the event, the employee is exonerated from the charges framed against him either in the Departmental proceeding and/or in the criminal proceeding and/or in both, the recommendation made by the Selection Committee is to be opened and promotion of the employee concerned to be effected accordingly. The petitioner in the present proceedings having been exonerated from the charges framed against him Page No.# 16/18 in the Departmental proceedings, so instituted against him, he was entitled to be considered for his promotion with retrospective effect i.e., w.e.f., the date, persons were so promoted, in terms of the recommendations made by the Departmental Selection Committee in its meeting held on 16-02-2021. This Court finds that in pursuance to the said recommendations of the Selection Committee, persons found eligible were promoted to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, vide a notification dated 26.02.2021, and persons junior to the petitioner also came to be so promoted. Accordingly, this Court holds the petitioner to be entitled to have his promotion effected to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, with retrospective effect i.e. w.e.f 26.02.2021. 16. In view of the above discussion, it is directed that the petitioner be promoted to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, w.e.f 26.02.2021. The petitioner on his such promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, w.e.f 26.02.2021, shall however be not entitled to any enhanced wages, and the salary of the petitioner w.e.f 26.02.2021, till the date of his superannuation, shall be notionally fixed in the scale of pay authorized to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest. The pay of the petitioner as on the date of his superannuation i.e. 31.03.2022, be so determined and the petitioner accordingly, be released his pension and pensionary benefits. 17. Accordingly, in view of the conclusions reached by this Court, with Page No.# 17/18 regard to the manner in which the case of the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest is to be now considered, the directions as contained in the order dated 05.12.2023, cancelling the promotion of the petitioner to the said cadre and his reversion to as Forest Ranger, is held to have been rendered inconsequential. 18. As regards the directions contained in the order dated 05.12.2023, for effecting recovery of the pay and allowances drawn by the petitioner for the period w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023, this Court finds that the petitioner had continued in his services beyond 31.03.2022, on being so permitted by the respondent authorities. No material had been brought on record to demonstrate that the petitioner has mis-represented in the matter in any manner, leading to the continuation by him in service. It is also to be noted that in the proceedings before this Court in WP(C).No.3642/2023, the respondent authorities had defended the decision arrived at by them initially, of the date of superannuation of the petitioner, falling on 31.03.2023. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered view that the salaries drawn by the petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023, would not be permissible to be so recovered. Accordingly, the order dated 05.12.2023, to the extent that it directs for recovery of the pay and allowances drawn by the petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023, stand interfered with. The petitioner now being Page No.# 18/18 permitted to retain the salaries drawn by him w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 31.03.2023, he although held to have retired from his services w.e.f. 31.03.2022, he would be entitled to receive his pension only w.e.f. 01.04.2023. 19. The Respondent Authorities are directed to compute the pay of the petitioner on the date of his superannuation in the scale of pay authorized to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, and to process the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner and disburse the same to him within a period of 03 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, strictly in terms of the directions passed, hereinabove. 20. With the above observations and directives, the present recommendation stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant