Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 882 (GAU)

BONNIESAN BASUMATARY AND 6 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS

WP(C)/1630/2026 · 2026-03-19

Soumitra Saikia

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010056482026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1630/2026 BONNIESAN BASUMATARY AND 6 ORS S/O-JESAI BASUMATARY, AGED ABOUT-38YEARS, VILL-KOILAMOILA, P.O- AMGURI, DIST-CHIRANG, BTC, ASSAM, PIN-793393 2: RIMILA NARZARY D/O-BUDANG NARZARY AGED ABOUT-38 YEARS VILL-BOSHGAON P.O-SORAIBIL DIST-KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM PIN-783350 3: SWAPAN NARZARY S/O-JERIMEA NARZARY AGED ABOUT-39 YEARS VILL-BHURPAR P.O-RUNIKHATA DIST-CHIRANG BTC ASSAM PIN-783375 4: PHWRMAI MOSHAHARY S/O- LATE ROBERT MOSHAHARY AGED ABOUT-38YEARS VILL-DENGCHIBARI P.O-DUTTAPUR DIST-CHIRANG BTC ASSAM PIN-783373 Page No.# 2/5 5: PROHILO NARZARY S/O-KHALEN NARZARY AGED ABOUT-41 YEARS VILL-EAST GARLABARI P.O.-DUTTAPUR DIST-CHIRANG BTC ASSAM PIN-783373 6: JAGAJIT BASUMATARY S/O-LATE RANDWNG BASUMATARY AGED ABOUT-39YEARS VILL-RUPNATHPUR P.O-KACHUGAON DIST-KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM PIN-783350 7: BIDANGSRI BIBI ISLARY D/O-LATE RAJEN ISLARY AGED ABOUT-38YEARS VILL-THAPLAJHORA P.O-BAIRALI DIST-KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM PIN-78335 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, ASSAM, GUWAHATI- 6 2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ASSAM REHABARI GUWAHATI-8. 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 4:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) Page No.# 3/5 REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370 5:THE SECRETARY FOREST DEPARTMENT BTC ASSAM PIN-783370 6:THE COUNCIL HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREST BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370 7:ADDL PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CUM COUNCIL HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT FOREST BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370 8:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER CHIRANG DIVISION KAJALGAON CHIRANG BTR ASSAM PIN783385 9:FOREST DEPOT OFFICER BASUGAON DEPOT OFFICER PIN-783372 10:FOREST RANGE OFFICER RUNIKHATA RANGE RUNIKHATA PIN-78337 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BORO, MS TOSHISENLA,MS N NEWME,MR H P GUWALA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST, SC, BTC,SC, FINANCE Page No.# 4/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 20.03 .2026 Heard Mr. A. Boro, learned counsel for the petitioner petitioners. Also heard Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, BTC. 2. Having regard to the nature of the case projected by the petitioners, the writ petition is taken up for disposal with the consent of the parties. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that due to shortages of manpower between the period of 2006-2007, they have been engaged as casual workers for protection of reserve forest and its forest resources under Chirang Division, Kajalgaon in the Forest Department, BTC. Even since their engagement, they have been working as such till date but have been paid only a meager sum of fixed wages. It is the case of the petitioners that they are entitled to get the benefit of minimum pay scale in terms of the decision render by a Division Bench of this Court in State of Assam Vs Shri. Upen Das reported in 2020 (5) GLT 605. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since there is no dispute, a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to pay the petitioner a minimum scale of pay in terms of Upen Das (supra). 5. Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, BTC on the other hand submits that the petitioners are only engaged on casual basis and since it is not a substantive appointment, there is no question of granting them the pay scale Page No.# 5/5 as claimed by them. It may however, be seen that the direction of a Division Bench of this Court in Upen Das (supra) all such Muster Roll Workers, Worked Charge Workers and similarly placed employees working since the last more than 10 years and not in a sanctioned post should be granted the minimum of pay scale w.e.f. 01.08.2017. Admittedly, the petitioners in the present case are not working against a sanctioned post but are engaged as casual workers since 2006-2007 which has not been disputed by the respondents. 6. Considering the same, the respondent authorities are directed to grant the petitioners the benefit of minimum pay scale in terms of Upen Das (supra). Before granting them such benefit, the respondents will be at liberty to make necessary verifications as may be required. The petitioners be afforded the minimum pay scale as directed above as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant